Law Commons^™

How The New Economics Can Improve Employment Discrimination Law, And How Economics Can Survive The Demise Of The Rational Actor, Scott A. Moss, Peter H. Huang

Publications

Much employment discrimination law is premised on a purely money-focused "reasonable" employee, the sort who can be made whole with damages equal to lost wages, and who does not hesitate to challenge workplace discrimination. This type of "rational" actor populated older economic models but has been since modified by behavioral economics and research on happiness. Behavioral and traditional economists alike have analyzed broad employment policies, such as the wisdom of discrimination statutes, but the devil is in the details of employment law. On the critical damages-and-liability issues the Supreme Court and litigators face regularly, the law essentially ignores the lessons …

Re Canada Post Corp And Cupw (036-03-00022), Innis Christie

Innis Christie Collection

Union grievance, submitted on September 20, 2006, on behalf of all affected employees alleging breach of Article 39 05 (e) and (f) of the Collective Agreement between the parties bearing the expiry date January 31, 2007, in that the Employer failed to offer overtime hours as required by those provisions. The Union sought an order that the Employer pay damages to compensate the affected employees.

Mandatory Arbitration: Why It's Better Than It Looks, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

"Mandatory arbitration" as used here means that employees must agree as a condition of employment to arbitrate all legal disputes with their employer, including statutory claims, rather than take them to court. The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of such agreements on the grounds that they merely provide for a change of forum and not a loss of substantive rights. Opponents contend this wrongfully deprives employees of the right to a jury trial and other statutory procedural benefits. Various empirical studies indicate, however, that employees similarly situated do about as well in arbitration as in court actions, or even …

Re Canada Post Corp And Cupw (Morgan), Innis Christie

Innis Christie Collection

The Grievor was suspended for inappropriate behaviour towards co-workers. The Union claims the three day suspension was without just, reasonable and sufficient cause and sought a remedy which would pay damages due to the suspension and removal of all related documents from the Grievor's personal file.

The grievance succeeds in part. Discipline was appropriate. There was nothing in the Grievor's personal record to support a three day suspension and one of the complaints warranted no discipline. The suspension is reduced to two days and the Grievor is to be compensated for losses resulting from the third day.

Hiring Ruled Contractual, Bill Gore, Douglas A. Kahn, Stan Shields

Articles

On December 29, 1988, the California Supreme Court decided Foley vs. Interactive Data Corp., perhaps the most eagerly awaited state supreme court decision in years. The Foley ruling, which immediately was hailed as a tremendous victory for California employers, eliminated punitive damage awards for many wrongfully terminated employees. That was good news for the employers. The decision, however, also provided employers with sobering news. Most significantly, the court ruled that employment relationships essentially are contracts, with terms created by the reasonable expectation of the parties. Thus, the majority of California employees now have a right to sue for breach …

A Critique Of The Justifications For Employee Suits In Strict Products Liability Against Third Party Manufacturers, Pierre John Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Albemarle Paper Co. V. Moody, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Re United Steelworkers And Vulcan Containers (Canada) Ltd, Innis Christie, C Gareau, N E. Wrycraft

Innis Christie Collection

Employee Discharge alleging unjust discharge. Determination of quantum of damages.

AWARD:

In an award dated November 21, 1969, this board ordered the grievor to be reinstated in employment with compensation for loss of income except for wages she would have received in the first two weeks following her discharge by the company. Mr. Wrycraft dissented. The majority award stated that the grievor was subject to a duty to mitigate her losses so that any actual earnings and an amount equal to any earnings that she could have had if she had made a reasonable and prudent effort to find other …

Authority Of Allen V. Flood, Horace Lafayette Wilgus

Articles

In the case of Allen v. Flood, one of the Lords asked this interesting question, "If the cook says to her master, 'Discharge the butler or I leave you,' and the master discharges the butler, does the butler have an action against the cook?" This, Lord Shand said, was the simplest form in which the very question in Allen v. Flood could be raised.4 And, like the original question, it puzzled the judges and Lords very much to answer.