The bill amends Minnesota Statutes 2024, section 363A.28, subdivision 10, to modify the provisions regarding disparate impact cases in employment. It specifies that if a complaining party demonstrates that the respondent's actions have a statistically significant adverse impact on a protected class, the respondent must justify their practice by showing that it significantly furthers an important business, governmental, or educational purpose. Additionally, the respondent must prove that the challenged practice is manifestly related to the job for the specific position in question.

The bill also introduces a new requirement that allows the charging party to prevail if they can demonstrate the existence of a comparably effective practice that would result in a significantly lesser adverse impact on the identified protected class. This change aims to clarify the burden of proof in disparate impact cases and ensure that employment practices are justifiable in relation to their impact on protected groups.

Statutes affected:
Introduction: 363A.28