Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Michigan Law School

Discrimination

Journal

Labor and Employment Law

Michigan Law Review

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Griggs At Midlife, Deborah A. Widiss Apr 2015

Griggs At Midlife, Deborah A. Widiss

Michigan Law Review

Not all Supreme Court cases have a midlife crisis. But it is fair to say that Griggs v. Duke Power Co., which recently turned forty, has some serious symptoms. Griggs established a foundational proposition of employment discrimination law known as disparate impact liability: policies that significantly disadvantage racial minority or female employees can violate federal employment discrimination law, even if there is no evidence that the employer “intended” to discriminate. Griggs is frequently described as one of the most important decisions of the civil rights era, compared to Brown v. Board of Education for its “momentous social consequences.” In 1989, …


The Disability-Employability Divide: Bottlenecks To Equal Opprotunity, Bradley A. Areheart, Michael Ashley Stein Apr 2015

The Disability-Employability Divide: Bottlenecks To Equal Opprotunity, Bradley A. Areheart, Michael Ashley Stein

Michigan Law Review

Equal opportunity might appear to comprise a relatively simple question: Do similarly situated persons have an equal chance to attain a particular goal, or do obstacles irrelevant to their qualifications or to the desired goal preclude achievement? But equal opportunity is complicated.1 There are descriptive and prescriptive dimensions to this question. Nuances exist when determining who is similarly situated, whether those individuals have the same opportunity, what goals we care about equalizing, and whether the ultimate aspiration is equality of opportunity or equality of outcome. Moreover, what means should we employ to remove obstacles, are these means likely to be …


An Administrative Battle Of The Forms: The Eeoc's Intake Questionnaire And Charge Of Discrimination, Laurie M. Stegman Oct 1992

An Administrative Battle Of The Forms: The Eeoc's Intake Questionnaire And Charge Of Discrimination, Laurie M. Stegman

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that the EEOC's interpretation of Title VII as reflected in its regulations is consistent with underlying statutory intent and strikes an appropriate balance between the needs of employers and employees. Therefore, Congress should amend section 706(b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to provide that a charge must be verified prior to the commencement of an EEOC investigation but not necessarily within the statutory filing period. Part I examines the legislative history of Title VII and its integrated procedures for obtaining administrative and judicial relief. Part II critiques the various ways in which …


Feminizing Unions: Challenging The Gendered Structure Of Wage Labor, Marion Crain Mar 1991

Feminizing Unions: Challenging The Gendered Structure Of Wage Labor, Marion Crain

Michigan Law Review

In this article, I argue that labor unions can be an effective, central tool in a feminist agenda targeting the gendered structure of wage labor. Collective action is the most powerful and expedient route to female empowerment; further, it is the only feasible means of transforming our deeply gendered market and family structure. Others have laid the groundwork by showing how existing individual-model challenges have been unable to accomplish such broad-based reform. I begin where they leave off.


Yankees Out Of North America: Foreign Employer Job Discrimination Against American Citizens, Michigan Law Review Oct 1984

Yankees Out Of North America: Foreign Employer Job Discrimination Against American Citizens, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note explores Title VII's relationship to the hiring practices of foreign employers. It focuses on Japanese employers, who might face the toughest Title VII challenge to a business and cultural familiarity or citizenship requirement. Part I sets out arguments for and against finding intentional discrimination - disparate treatment - in either of these hiring requirements. It suggests that a court should refuse to find national origin discrimination when the employer imposes a business and cultural familiarity requirement. However, when an applicant is denied employment solely on the basis of citizenship, a strong argument may be made that the …


Employee Selection Base On Susceptibility To Occupational Illness, Mark A. Rothstein May 1983

Employee Selection Base On Susceptibility To Occupational Illness, Mark A. Rothstein

Michigan Law Review

This Article attempts to compile the latest information available concerning this difficult problem. Part I reviews the scientific literature, explaining the biological basis of increased risk of occupational disease. Part II explores the efforts of various employers to incorporate this research into their personnel practices. Part III surveys the legal response to these practices. Employees may challenge medical screening on a variety of theories, most of which were not designed to deal with the problem of susceptibility to occupational disease. Not surprisingly, none of the approaches offers an entirely satisfactory response to the problem. This Article offers no clear answers. …


Labor Law -Refusal To Reinstate As An Unfair Labor Practice, David Davidoff Aug 1942

Labor Law -Refusal To Reinstate As An Unfair Labor Practice, David Davidoff

Michigan Law Review

The defendant company, operating a produce plant, was found guilty by the National Labor Relations Board of several unfair labor practices, inter alia, the discrimination against certain employees in refusing to reinstate them because of their union affiliations and activities. Defendant's superintendent testified that he had refused to rehire the employees in question because of their inability to get along with the other employees and the ill feeling which their union activities had engendered toward them. The board did not accept this explanation, and ordered the reinstatement of these employees with back pay. Held, there was discrimination under section …