Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
English Only At Work, Por Favor, Natalie Prescott
English Only At Work, Por Favor, Natalie Prescott
Natalie Prescott
Whether or not employees can be required to speak only English at work is a very delicate question. This issue has caused considerable disagreement among courts and legal scholars and gained greater prominence in 2006, when the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals created a circuit split by allowing for the possibility that an English-only rule may violate Title VII. Some scholars have attempted to address the legality of an English-only rule, mostly arguing that the rule violates Title VII. This Article, however, explains why Title VII does not apply to an English-only rule. The Article addresses a wide range of …
Local Governance In Bangladesh: Towards A “Critical Mass” To Combat Discrimination Against Women With Special Reference To India, Afroza Begum
Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts - Papers (Archive)
Women’s right to freedom from discrimination is the constitutionally entrenched fundamental right… and is repeatedly guaranteed in a series of legislation in Bangladesh. Bangladesh also assumes affirmative obligations to respect and ensure this right through ratifying over a dozen international human rights instruments. Despite that fact, discrimination persists in a pervasive form to deny women’s equal rights in legislative offices…, and women are unjustifiably deprived of their lawful rights and privileges….Legal initiatives and women’s activism across nations have forced to significant modifications in policies of political parties and laws to redress women’s meagre status in governance. Drawing upon this insight, …
Perceiving Subtle Sexism: Mapping The Social-Psychological Forces And Legal Narratives That Obscure Gender Bias, Deborah L. Brake
Perceiving Subtle Sexism: Mapping The Social-Psychological Forces And Legal Narratives That Obscure Gender Bias, Deborah L. Brake
Articles
This essay seeks to explain the Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education case as an interpretation of discrimination that notably and correctly focuses on how institutions cause sex-based harm, rather than on whether officials within chosen institutions act with a discriminatory intent. In the process, I discuss what appears to be the implicit theory of discrimination underlying the Davis decision: that schools cause the discrimination by exacerbating the harm that results from sexual harassment by students. I then explore the significance of the deliberate indifference requirement in this context, concluding that the standard, for all its flaws, is distinct …