The Problem
Courts alone cannot transform the workforce. Decades of litigation have demonstrated that judicial remedies, while essential for establishing legal precedent, cannot by themselves dismantle the structural barriers that prevent disadvantaged groups from accessing meaningful employment.
Neutral employment policies — facially race-blind hiring practices, standardized testing, and credentialing requirements — continue to produce disparate impact on disadvantaged groups including minorities, veterans, formerly incarcerated individuals, and persons with disabilities. The law requires more than neutrality; it demands that when a policy produces disparate impact, employers must adopt available Alternative Employment Practices that serve their legitimate interests with less discriminatory effect.
The Percy Solution
The Percy Solution is based on the landmark civil rights case Percy v. Brennan, Civil Action No. 73-CV-04279 (S.D.N.Y.), reported at 384 F. Supp. 800 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).
Albert Percy: class representative in the Percy litigation. Albert Percy immigrated to the United States from Trinidad in 1966. He served honorably in the U.S. Army. Following his military service, Albert Percy worked for 25 years in New York City water treatment infrastructure, contributing directly to the essential services that sustain millions of New Yorkers. His case established that facially neutral employment practices producing disparate impact require adoption of less discriminatory alternatives.
The Three-Part Framework:
- The mentor gets a benefit of paid compensation to coach and guide — experienced workers receive direct financial incentive to share institutional knowledge, trade skills, and professional wisdom with incoming employees.
- New workers collaborate with new technology creativity as skills develop on-the-job (OJT) improving both new workers and mentors — the training relationship is bidirectional: new workers bring fresh perspectives and technological fluency while mentors provide experience and judgment, creating mutual improvement.
- Resulting in employers getting qualified new and improved employees — the outcome serves legitimate employer interests: a trained, qualified workforce developed through structured OJT at reduced cost compared to traditional hiring and training methods.
