Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Civil Rights and Discrimination

2001

Washington Law Review

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Closing A Discrimination Loophole: Using Title Vii's Anti-Retaliation Provision To Prevent Employers From Requiring Unlawful Arbitration Agreements As Conditions Of Continued Employment, Sidney Charlotte Reynolds Jul 2001

Closing A Discrimination Loophole: Using Title Vii's Anti-Retaliation Provision To Prevent Employers From Requiring Unlawful Arbitration Agreements As Conditions Of Continued Employment, Sidney Charlotte Reynolds

Washington Law Review

Courts have long viewed mandatory arbitration agreements (MAAs) as contract provisions that employees may accept or decline based on the common law doctrine of employment at-will. However, employees may see such MAAs as attempts to curtail Title VII rights and may refuse to sign them. Title VII prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who oppose discriminatory employment practices. A legal loophole has developed where some employers seek explicitly or implicitly to exempt themselves from Title VII's provisions by drafting MAAs that eliminate statutory rights and remedies from the arbitration process or deter employees from filing discrimination claims altogether. The U.S. …


Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Defense: Eliminating The Equal-Opportunity-Harasser Defense, Shylah Miles Apr 2001

Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Defense: Eliminating The Equal-Opportunity-Harasser Defense, Shylah Miles

Washington Law Review

Sexual harassment is a prevalent problem in the American workplace that accounts for nearly sixty-four percent of all gender discrimination claims under Title VII. The equal-opportunity-harasser defense allows harassers who target both males and females to escape liability. Courts have allowed the defense because they have interpreted the "because of sex" element of a sexual harassment claim to require disparate treatment or a showing that the plaintiffs would not have been harassed if they were members of the opposite sex. An equal-opportunity harasser harasses both sexes and, therefore, plaintiffs cannot prove disparate treatment. This Comment argues that the disparate-treatment requirement …


The Reasonable Girl: A New Reasonableness Standard To Determine Sexual Harassment In Schools, Carrie L. Hoon Jan 2001

The Reasonable Girl: A New Reasonableness Standard To Determine Sexual Harassment In Schools, Carrie L. Hoon

Washington Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education that schools may be liable under Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments for student-to-student hostile-environment sexual harassment. Although the Court required that conduct be severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive to qualify as sexual harassment under the statute, it did not establish an objective reasonableness standard to evaluate allegedly harassing conduct. In the context of Title VII employment-discrimination jurisprudence, some courts apply a reasonable-woman standard to determine what conduct is objectively hostile or abusive such that it constitutes actionable hostile-environment sexual harassment in the workplace. This Comment …


The Equal Pay Act As Appropriate Legislation Under Section 5 Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Can State Employers Be Sued?, Thane Somerville Jan 2001

The Equal Pay Act As Appropriate Legislation Under Section 5 Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Can State Employers Be Sued?, Thane Somerville

Washington Law Review

Congress may constitutionally abrogate state sovereign immunity only through legislation enacted pursuant to Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, the U.S. Supreme Court held the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to be inappropriate Section 5 legislation. Kimel was the first time the Court held an anti-discrimination statute enacted to protect civil rights inapplicable to the states. Based on the Kimel decision, other civil rights statutes, such as the Equal Pay Act (EPA), may face similar challenges. This Comment argues that the EPA is appropriate Section 5 legislation. Unlike …