Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Watson: Subjective Promotion Practices Can Be Tested for Disparate Impact

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 4, 2026

Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust involved a Black employee passed over for four supervisory promotions selected through white supervisors’ subjective judgments.

The bank lacked precise formal criteria

Promotion decisions depended substantially on supervisors familiar with the candidates and jobs.

The lower court used only intentional-discrimination analysis

It refused to test subjective selection under disparate-impact doctrine.

Subjective practices can create neutral-looking barriers

The Court reasoned that limiting impact review to objective tests would let employers insulate screening by adding discretion.

The case was vacated and remanded

The lower courts had to evaluate the statistical evidence and challenged practices under the proper framework, subject to current statutory law.

Key takeaways

• Identify the specific decision process being challenged.
• Preserve applicant-pool, selection, and comparator data.
• Use statistically sound analysis tied to the practice.
• Analyze disparate treatment and disparate impact separately.