Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Affirmative action (1)
- Class actions (1)
- Coercion (1)
- Commercial speech (1)
- Deception (1)
-
- Employer speech (1)
- Employment discrimination (1)
- FLSA (1)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Listeners (1)
- Powerful speakers (1)
- Professional speech (1)
- Racial equity (1)
- Reproductive health care speech (1)
- Rule 20 joinder (1)
- Rule 23 certification (1)
- Vulnerable listeners (1)
- Wage collective actions (1)
- Wage rights (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Radical Reconstruction: (Re) Embracing Affirmative Action In Private Employment, Hina B. Shah
Radical Reconstruction: (Re) Embracing Affirmative Action In Private Employment, Hina B. Shah
Publications
The history of employment in this country is the history of racism. Using public and private mechanisms as well as violence to devise and enforce segregation and preferential treatment, the white male institutionalized an unprecedented advantage in the labor market. Yet this is rarely acknowledged as a factor in the current widening economic disparity between whites and blacks. Today, many white Americans, cloaked in the myth of colorblindness and meritocracy, refuse to see the persistence of racial prejudice, disadvantage and discrimination in the labor market.
This article is a call for a radical reconstruction of the private labor market through …
Powerful Speakers And Their Listeners, Helen Norton
Powerful Speakers And Their Listeners, Helen Norton
Publications
In certain settings, law sometimes puts listeners first when their First Amendment interests collide with speakers’. And collide they often do. Sometimes speakers prefer to tell lies when their listeners thirst for the truth. Sometimes listeners hope that speakers will reveal their secrets, while those speakers resist disclosure. And at still other times, speakers seek to address certain listeners when those listeners long to be left alone. When speakers’ and listeners’ First Amendment interests collide, whose interests should prevail? Law sometimes – but not always – puts listeners’ interests first in settings outside of public discourse where those listeners have …
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 …