Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- 1981 (1)
- But-for cause (1)
- Causal doctrines (1)
- Cause of action (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
-
- Class actions (1)
- Clinical Pedagogy (1)
- Congress (1)
- Employment (1)
- Employment contracts (1)
- Employment discrimination (1)
- FLSA (1)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (1)
- Motivating factor (1)
- Race discrimination (1)
- Rule 20 joinder (1)
- Rule 23 certification (1)
- Standards (1)
- Tort (1)
- Wage collective actions (1)
- Wage rights (1)
- Workplace (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Labor and Employment Law
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
This Court should not interpret section 1981 to require proof of but-for causation, given that statute’s text, history, and purpose. Although Comcast invokes the canon of statutory construction that Congress intends statutory terms to have their settled common-law meaning, that canon does not apply here. Section 1981 has no statutory text that reflects a common-law understanding of causation. Indeed, in 1866, when Congress enacted the predecessor to section 1981, there was no well-settled common law of tort at all. Rather, just as courts have read 42 U.S.C. § 1982, which shares common text, history and purpose, this Court should read …
No Longer A Second-Class Class Action? Finding Common Ground In The Debate Over Wage Collective Actions With Best Practices For Litigation And Adjudication, Scott A. Moss, Nantiya Ruan
No Longer A Second-Class Class Action? Finding Common Ground In The Debate Over Wage Collective Actions With Best Practices For Litigation And Adjudication, Scott A. Moss, Nantiya Ruan
Publications
Rule 23 class actions include all potential members, if granted certification. For wage claims, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) allows not class but collective actions covering only those opting in. Courts have practiced Rule 23-style gatekeeping in collective actions – requiring certification motions, which they deny if members lack enough commonality. Our 2012 article argued against this practice. No statute or rule grants judges the § 216(b) gatekeeping power early cases assumed, and with good reason: opt-in reduces the agency problems justifying Rule 23 gatekeeping; and Congress passed § 216(b) as not a stricter, opt-in form of class action, but liberalized …
Wage Theft In Lawless Courts, Llezlie Green
Wage Theft In Lawless Courts, Llezlie Green
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Low-wage workers experience wage theft — that is, employers’ failure to pay earned wages — at alarmingly high rates. Indeed, the number of wage and hour cases filed in federal and state courts and administrative agencies steadily increases every year. While much of the scholarly assessment of wage and hour litigation focuses on large collective and class actions involving hundreds or thousands of workers and millions of dollars in lost wages, the experiences of individual workers with small claims have received little attention. Furthermore, scholarly consideration of the justice gap in lower courts, more generally, has often focused on debt …