Law Commons^™

Cracks In The Shield: The Necessity Of The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, James N. Bolotin

James N Bolotin

This paper argues that legislation protecting homosexuals from employment discrimination is necessary, despite hopeful arguments that the text of Title VII should or can already protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation. The paper discusses how the precedent of the federal courts has gone too far in the wrong direction to believe that they will fix this interpretation problem on their own. Furthermore, it posits that the passage of ENDA or similar legislation will successfully lessen the prevalence of this type of discrimination.

Part I considers the history of Title VII’s “because of sex” protection. This includes a short discussion …

"That Gear Stick Is Not Your Husband's P----." Why The Dissent In Vance V. Ball State University Got It Right, And A Comparison Of The Law Of Employer Vicarious Liability For Sexual Harassment In The United States And South Africa, Justin A. Behravesh

Justin A. Behravesh

This article provides unique critical analysis of the United States Supreme Court's June 2013 decision of Vance v. Ball State University, by comparing that decision to recent South African common law and statutory developments. I argue that Vance's redefinition of what constitutes a "supervisor" for purposes of vicarious liability will have devastating effect on working women in the United States. Ultimately using South African law as a model framework, I conclude that the factors that should trigger vicarious liability should be based on policy concerns, not arbitrary definitions of what constitutes a "supervisor."

Freedmen And Day Laborers: Why Enforcement Matters, Raja Raghunath

Raja Raghunath

As the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Emancipation approaches, there is a cautionary lesson for modern workers from the period that followed the abolition of chattel slavery. Reconstruction, after the Civil War, was the moment when the promise of universal liberty to work first became part of the American state’s covenant with its people. But this promise was quickly lost, as the rights that the federal government extended to the freed slaves – the freedmen – were contested and eventually nullified by vehement opposition in the working fields and cities of the South. In this sense, workers’ rights were …