Labor and Employment Law Commons^™

From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Unfair Method Of Rulemaking: An Application Of Constitutional Doctrines That Oppose The Ftc Rule Banning Non-Competition Agreements, Jared Yaggie

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Breaking The Non-Compete Cycle: A Legal And Economic Analysis Of The Ftc's Power Move, Stephen Fox

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Releasing The Captives: How The National Labor Relations Board Can Correct The Anomalous Captive Audience Meeting Doctrine, Adam J. Drapcho

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Do We Do With You: How The United States Uses Racial-Gendered Immigrant Labor To Inform Its Immigrant Inclusion-Exclusion Cycle, Tori Delaney

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Turn Up The Volume: The Connick Pickering Test As A Remedy For Quiet Quitting And The Covid-19 Pandemic’S Impact On Critical Private Employment Issues, Megan E. Bowling

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

More Than They Bargained For: Ab 257 And An Alternative Approach To Labor Law In California's Fast-Food Industry, Alex Reid

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Whistleblower Protection Under The False Claims Act: Providing Former Employee Inclusion, Nathaniel Kinman

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hiring Criteria And Title Vii: How One Manifestation Of Employer Bias Evades Judicial Scrutiny, Max Londberg

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Connick/Garcetti Split: Is Public Employee Association A Matter Of Public Concern?, Austin J. Wishart

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Privacy Please — Direct Observation Drug Testing & Invasion Of Privacy, Elizabeth Black

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Covid Silver Lining? How Telework May Be A Reasonable Accommodation After All, Baylee Kalmbach

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Political Equality And First Amendment Challenges To Labor Law, Luke Taylor

University of Cincinnati Law Review

This Article conceptualizes a novel basis for defending laws that strengthen labor unions from First Amendment challenge: the argument that these laws are adequately tailored to advancing a compelling state interest in reducing economic inequality’s transmission into political inequality. The Article makes two principal contributions. First, it updates criticisms of the Supreme Court’s campaign finance decisions’ rejection of any compelling interest sounding in political equality. The Article does so by bringing recent constitutional scholarship to bear on that criticism and by explaining how recent improvements in social scientists’ ability to track different economic brackets’ political influence call for the Court …

Untangling Discrimination: The Crown Act And Protecting Black Hair, Alesha Hamilton

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Local Right-To-Work Ordinances: Why § 14(B) Of The National Labor Relations Act Preempts Political Subdivisions From Regulating Union-Security Agreements, Michael Soder

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Disbelief Doctrines, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Employment discrimination law is riddled with doctrines that tell courts to believe employers and not workers. Judges often use these disbelief doctrines to dismiss cases at the summary judgment stage. At times, judges even use them after a jury trial to justify nullifying jury verdicts in favor of workers.

This article brings together many disparate discrimination doctrines and shows how they function as disbelief doctrines, causing courts to believe employers and not workers. The strongest disbelief doctrines include the stray comments doctrine, the same decisionmaker inference, and the same protected class inference. However, these are not the only ones. Even …

Introduction (Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law), Sandra F. Sperino, Suja A. Thomas

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

This is chapter 1 of Sandra F. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas, Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law (2017)

Everybody's Vaping For The Weekend: Nicotine Addiction As A Workplace Disability, Matthew M. Allen

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice Kennedy's Big New Idea, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In a 2015 case, the Supreme Court held that plaintiffs could bring disparate impact claims under the Fair Housing Act (the "FHA"). In the majority opinion, Justice Kennedy relied heavily on the text and supporting case law interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act ("Title VII") and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (the "ADEA '). Without explicitly recognizing the powerful new idea he was advocating, Justice Kennedy's majority opinion radically reconceptualized federal employment discrimination jurisprudence. This new reading of Title VII and the ADEA changes both the theoretical framing of the discrimination statutes and greatly expands their scope. …

Retaliation And The Reasonable Person, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

When a worker complains about discrimination, federal law is supposed to protect that worker from later retaliation. Recent scholarly attention focuses on how courts limit retaliation claims by narrowly framing the causation inquiry. A larger threat to retaliation law is developing in the lower courts. Courts are declaring a wide swath of conduct as insufficiently serious to constitute retaliation.

Many courts hold that it is legal for an employer to threaten to fire a worker, to place the worker on administrative leave, or to negatively evaluate the worker because she complained about discriminatory conduct. Even if the worker has evidence …

The Tort Label, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Courts and commentators often label federal discrimination statutes as torts. Since the late 1980s, the courts increasingly applied tort concepts to these statutes. This Article discusses how courts placed employment discrimination law within the organizational umbrella of tort law without examining whether the two areas share enough theoretical and doctrinal affinities.

While discrimination statutes are torts in some general sense that they do not arise out of criminal law and are not solely contractual, it is far from clear that these statutes are enough like traditional torts to justify the reflexive and automatic use of tort law. Employment discrimination statutes …

Fakers And Floodgates, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

There has always been the possibility of judicial skepticism about employment discrimination claims. Recently, the Supreme Court made this skepticism explicit. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the Supreme Court expressed concern about fake claims and floodgates of litigation. It then used these arguments to tip the substantive law against retaliation claims. This article responds to this explicit skepticism about discrimination claims. First, it shows that the Court created reasons to limit retaliation claims that are not tied to congressional intent. Second, the factual claims that the Court makes are not grounded in evidence, and available information …

Let's Pretend Discrimination Is A Tort, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In the past decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly invoked tort common law to interpret federal discrimination statutes. During this same time period, the Supreme Court increasingly invoked textualism as the appropriate methodology for interpreting these statutes. One immediate effect of these two trends - tortification and textualism - is to restrict discrimination law by tightening causal standards.

This Article explores how interpreting discrimination statutes through the lenses of tort law and textualism can expand, rather than restrict, discrimination law. It assumes that courts will continue to characterize discrimination statutes as torts and as deriving from the common law, despite …

Torts And Civil Rights Law: Migration And Conflict: Symposium Introduction, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Curiously, the connection between civil rights and civil wrongs has not been a topic that has captivated the attention of large numbers of legal scholars over the years. The distance that has developed between the two fields likely reflects their placement on opposite sides of the public-private divide, with Title VII and other anti-discrimination statutes forming part of public law, while torts is a classic, private law subject. To compound the division, both subjects are to some extent still under-theorized. Employment discrimination scholarship is often caught up in the process of analyzing the doctrinal implications of the latest Supreme Court …

Beyond Mcdonnell Douglas, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Since 1973, the McDonnell Douglas framework has been a key analytical structure in employment discrimination law. Academic debate regarding the framework has alternately sounded its death knell, posited its irrelevance, or asserted its continued vitality. What has gone unnoticed in this discussion is the gradual weakening of the framework over the past two decades. Rather than casting this test into oblivion, courts are slowly chipping away at its preeminent place as a proof structure.

Little by little, courts are gradually eroding the McDonnell Douglas test's power through both procedural and substantive means. Procedurally, courts have questioned, rejected or diminished the …

Discrimination Statutes, The Common Law, And Proximate Cause, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The Supreme Court has recently hinted that courts should use proximate cause in Title VII cases. This Article anticipates future judicial forays into this area and argues that proximate cause principles should not be imported into federal discrimination law. This inquiry dovetails into a broader conversation about the proper role of proximate cause in federal statutes, a subject which has produced a fractured jurisprudence.

Courts and commentators have often indicated that employment discrimination law is a tort. While this statement may be true, it is too general to provide guidance on whether to apply proximate cause. It ignores that both …

Revitalizing State Employment Discrimination Law, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Over the past few decades, federal discrimination law has become captive to an increasingly complex web of analytical frameworks. The courts have been unable to articulate a consistent causation or intent standard for federal law or to provide a uniform account of the type of injury the plaintiff is required to suffer. Part of this failure is demonstrated in the ever-increasing rift between how courts construct the discrimination inquiry for federal age discrimination claims and claims based on other traits, such as sex and race.

Unfortunately, the courts are unnecessarily taking state employment discrimination claims into this federal morass. When …

Litigating The Fmla In The Shadow Of Title Vii, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The history of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a history of frameworks. In an almost predictable pattern, the Supreme Court has recognized a category of employment discrimination, and then, either in the same case, or sometime thereafter, created a multi-part test for evaluating it. Congress enacted the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in 1993, almost 30 years after it enacted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This Essay argues that the FMLA is litigated within the shadow of Title VII, as courts routinely apply complex frameworks developed in the Title VII context to …

Direct Employer Liability For Punitive Damages, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In Punitive Damages, Due Process, and Employment Discrimination, Joseph Seiner tackles the growing complexity of employment discrimination punitive damages claims and provides a workable solution to a difficult problem. Given the importance of punitive damages in shaping incentives to bring discrimination suits, his contribution is valuable, especially in trying to align recent constitutional punitive damages cases with the underlying discrimination law.

This Essay begins by emphasizing the fundamental idea on which Professor Seiner and I agree-that there should be little room for courts to reduce punitive damages in federal employment discrimination cases based on constitutional concerns about excessiveness. Title …