Law Commons^™

Salary History And Pay Parity, Jennifer Safstrom

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Inquiries about a prospective applicant's salary history are controversial because of the role such inequities play in the broader gender pay equity debate. The use of prior salary to determine compensation can perpetuate pay discrimination for women, especially women of color, and lock them into cycles of underpayment when these inequities are carried over from job to job. Reliance on salary history perpetuates historical discrimination and is antithetical to the language and purpose of Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the legal reasoning relied upon to interpret these laws, especially …

Brief Of Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. Francois, And Eric Schnapper As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner In Peterson V. Linear Controls Incorporated, No. 18-1401 (U.S. Supreme Court June 6, 2019), Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. François

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

In Title VII disparate-treatment, employment-discrimination cases, the term “adverse employment action” originally developed as judicial shorthand for the statute’s text, which broadly prohibits any discriminatory conduct by an employer against an employee based on the employee's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. See 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)(1). But what started simply as shorthand has taken on a life of its own and now improperly limits the statute’s reach. The Fifth Circuit’s version of the adverse-employment-action rule stands out as especially improper: Only an “ultimate employment decision”—a refusal to hire, a firing, a demotion, or the like—constitutes impermissible discrimination.

In this …

Is Title Vii > Ix?: Does Title Vii Preempt Title Ix Sex Discrimination Claims In Higher Ed Employment?, Mckenzie Miller

Catholic University Law Review

Across all job sectors, women working full-time earned about 80 percent of what men earned in 2016. Within higher education this gender gap persists in salary, hiring, promotions, and other aspects of academic employment. Professors can seemingly attempt to remedy this under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act or Title IX of the Education Amendments, both of which prohibit sex discrimination in higher education. Circuits, however, have split as to whether Title VII preempts Title IX in actions for employment discrimination in higher education.

The Third Circuit revived this split in Doe v. Mercy Catholic Medical Center, and …

Back To The Drawing Board! Legislating Hollywood, Christina Shu Jien Chong

Georgia State University Law Review

The United States Department of Justice “contended that equal employment opportunity in the broadcast industry could ‘contribute significantly toward reducing . . . discrimination in other industries’ because of the ‘enormous impact . . . television . . . [has] upon American life.’” Courts have also recognized that “communities . . . ’[must] take an active interest in the . . . quality of [television programming because television] has a vast impact on their lives and the lives of their children.’” Unfortunately, Hollywood continues to promote an insular culture that excludes minorities from influential behind-the-camera and on-screen positions.

Although the …

Title Ix And Title Vii: Parallel Remedies In Combatting Sex Discrimination In Educational Employment, Lynn Ridgeway Zehrt

Marquette Law Review

The federal circuit courts of appeals are divided over the proper relationship between Title IX of the Higher Education Amendments Act of 1972 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the federal courts disagree over whether an employee of an educational institution may sue her employer for employment discrimination under either Title IX or Title VII. Some courts have concluded that these employees may not bring employment discrimination claims under Title IX, holding that Title VII provides the sole avenue for obtaining monetary relief for employment discrimination against educational institutions. Other courts have reached the opposite …

Battle Of The Sexes: Title Vii’S Failure To Protect Women From Discrimination Against Sex-Linked Conditions, Brooks Land

Georgia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Purposes Of Title Vii, Chuck Henson

Faculty Publications

Some things have an obvious and enduring purpose. The purpose of a hammer is to drive nails. The purpose of a saw is to cut wood. The purpose of nails is to fasten, for example, the freshly cut wood by being driven by a hammer. For other things, like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Act" or "1964 Act"), purpose seems mutable or hidden. For example, finishing the sentence today: "The purpose of Title VII is . . ." presents a problem. It has presented the same problem since 1964. What Title VII does is not obvious …

Mixed Signals: What Can We Expect From The Supreme Court In This Post-Ada Amendments Act Era?, Nicole Buonocore Porter

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Disability Rights Protections For Transgender People, Kevin M. Barry, Jennifer L. Levi

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Application Of Title Ii Of The Americans With Disabilities Act To Employment Discrimination: Why The Circuits Have Gotten It Wrong, William Brooks

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Intersectional Critique Of Tiers Of Scrutiny: Beyond “Either/Or” Approaches To Equal Protection, Devon W. Carbado, Kimberlé W. Crenshaw

Faculty Scholarship

For the past forty years, Justice Powell’s concurring opinion in University of California v. Bakke has been at the center of scholarly debates about affirmative action. Notwithstanding the enormous attention Justice Powell’s concurrence has received, scholars have paid little attention to a passage in that opinion that expressly takes up the issue of gender. Drawing on the theory of intersectionality, this Essay explains several ways in which its reasoning is flawed. The Essay also shows how interrogating Justice Powell’s “single axis” race and gender analysis raises broader questions about tiers of scrutiny for Black women. Through a hypothetical of a …

Antidiscriminatory Algorithms, Stephanie Bornstein

UF Law Faculty Publications

Can algorithms be used to advance equality goals in the workplace? A handful of legal scholars have raised concerns that the use of big data at work may lead to protected class discrimination that could fall outside the reach of current antidiscrimination law. Existing scholarship suggests that, because algorithms are “facially neutral,” they pose no problem of unequal treatment. As a result, algorithmic discrimination cannot be challenged using a disparate treatment theory of liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). Instead, it presents a problem of unequal outcomes, subject to challenge using Title VII’s …