Law Commons^™

Protecting The Compromised Worker: : A Challenge For Employment Discrimination Law, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

The Compromised Worker And The Limits Of Employment Discrimination Law, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

Why do employment discrimination plaintiffs fare so poorly? Many explanations have been offered, but this essay suggests a new one: a substantial fraction of all plaintiffs are “compromised” workers, meaning that they have done something on the job that might plausibly justify the treatment about which they are complaining. As a matter of both doctrine and logic, compromised plaintiffs can be legitimate victims of discrimination. But they face substantial difficulties in proving that their employer relied on a prohibited characteristic in its treatment of them because, by definition, their behavior offers a plausibly legitimate explanation for their treatment. After demonstrating …

Contributory Disparate Impacts In Employment Discrimination Law, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

An employer who adopts a facially neutral employment practice that disqualifies a larger proportion of protected-class applicants than others is liable under a disparate impact theory. Defendants can escape liability if they show that the practice is justified by business necessity. But demonstrating business necessity requires costly validation studies that themselves impose a significant burden on defendants-upwards of $100,000 according to some estimates. This Article argues that an employer should have a defense against disparate impact liability if it can show that protected-class applicants failed to make reasonable efforts to train or prepare for a job related test. That is, …

The Evolution Of Employment Discrimination Law In The 1990s: An Empirical Examination, John Donohue, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

Two major pieces of employment discrimination legislation were passed in the early 1990s: the 1991 Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act. Using some simple regression models, we examine the effects of this legislation on the volume, content and outcomes of employment discrimination cases filed in federal courts. We find, first, that the volume of discrimination cases nearly doubled between 1992 and 1997, in contrast to a 10 percent decline during the previous 8 years, and despite a sharply falling unemployment rate that–in the past–would have substantially reduced the amount of litigation. We also observe a significant shift in …

Race And Radio: Preference Externalities, Minority Ownership, And The Underprovision Of Programming To Black And Hispanic Listeners., Peter Siegelman, Joel Waldfogel

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

Racial Discrimination In ‘Everyday’ Commercial Transactions: What Do We Know, What Do We Need To Know, And How Can We Find Out?, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

The Q-Word As Red Herring: Why Disparate Impact Liability Does Not Induce Hiring Quotas, Ian Ayres, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

Race And Gender Discrimination In Bargaining For A New Car, Ian Ayres, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

Shaky Grounds: The Case Against The Case Against Antidiscrimination Laws [Review Essay On Richard Epstein, Forbidden Grounds], Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

Law And Macroeconomics: Employment Discrimination Litigation Over The Business Cycle, John Donohue, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

The Urban Institute Audit Studies: Their Methods And Findings, James Heckman, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.

The Changing Nature Of Employment Discrimination Litigation, John Donohue, Peter Siegelman

Peter Siegelman

No abstract provided.