Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Watson: Disparate-Impact Analysis Can Reach Subjective Promotion Practices

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published August 29, 2026

Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust arose after a Black employee was repeatedly denied promotion through a system relying heavily on supervisors’ subjective judgments.

Subjectivity is an employment practice

An employer cannot place a selection system beyond disparate-impact review merely by using interviews, recommendations, or discretion instead of a written test.

The plaintiff must isolate the challenged mechanism

A generalized racial imbalance is not enough; the analysis must connect disparity to a particular practice or an inseparable decision process.

Statistics must be probative

The relevant labor pool, sample, selection rates, and methodology determine whether the evidence supports causation rather than chance or an improper comparison.

Business justification and alternatives remain central

Current statutory law governs the employer’s burden and the plaintiff’s opportunity to identify an effective, less discriminatory alternative.

Key takeaways

• Map each stage and decisionmaker in the promotion process.
• Identify the specific subjective criteria or inseparable system.
• Use the correct qualified comparison pool and test statistical reliability.
• Assess job-related structure and less discriminatory alternatives.