Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Employee Rights (2)
- Employment Discrimination (2)
- National Labor Relations Act (2)
- After-Acquired Evidence (1)
- Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (1)
-
- Convict Labor (1)
- Disabled Persons (1)
- Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in Employment (1)
- Employee Rules (1)
- Harassment (1)
- Industrial Relations (1)
- Labor Disputes (1)
- Labor Laws (1)
- Labor Unions (1)
- McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co. (513 U.S. 352 (1995)) (1)
- Picketing (1)
- Prisoners (1)
- Prisoners’ Rights (1)
- Prisons—History (1)
- Protected Concerted Activity (Labor Law) (1)
- Swearing (Profanity) (1)
- Unfair Labor Practices (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
To Bar Or Not To Bar: Title I Of The Ada And After-Acquired Evidence Of A Plaintiff's Failure To Satisfy Job Prerequisites, Kathryn Johnson-Monfort
To Bar Or Not To Bar: Title I Of The Ada And After-Acquired Evidence Of A Plaintiff's Failure To Satisfy Job Prerequisites, Kathryn Johnson-Monfort
William & Mary Business Law Review
Through enactment of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, Congress unequivocally resolved to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in the workplace. However, distortions have since created loopholes through which disability-based employment discrimination may freely slip. An enforcement regulation promulgated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enables such circumvention of the ADA by creating an additional prima facie requirement: a plaintiff must not only be able to perform the essential functions of the position as required by the statute, but must also satisfy all job-related requirements of the position as demanded by the …
Working On The Other Side Of The Fence: Relief For Incarcerated Individuals After Employment Discrimination, Hannah C. Merrill
Working On The Other Side Of The Fence: Relief For Incarcerated Individuals After Employment Discrimination, Hannah C. Merrill
William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice
One of America’s largest workforces, comprised of 1.5 million incarcerated workers, remains unprotected by employment discrimination statutes and vulnerable to abuse from a system designed to exploit their labor. This Note highlights the effects of the lack of protection against employment discrimination for incarcerated workers. This Note will analyze the circuit split regarding the application of employment discrimination statutes to prisoners based on varying understandings of the term “employee” and explain why both approaches fail incarcerated workers. Although one approach bars suit from incarcerated employees altogether, the other only allows suit when the incarcerated individual is working in an “optional” …
Stifling Nascent Concerted Activity: The Nlrb And The Alstate Decision, Melanie R. Allen
Stifling Nascent Concerted Activity: The Nlrb And The Alstate Decision, Melanie R. Allen
William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) made a number of significant changes to the interpretation and enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act) under the Trump administration. The collective impact of these changes may make it more difficult for workers to bring successful unfair labor practice charges against their employers. Although NLRB case decisions and rulemaking affect a large proportion of American workers, the significance of these policy changes is often not widely recognized. This Note will examine one such change—the Board’s 2019 Alstate Maintenance decision that overturned its 2011 decision in WorldMark by Wyndham.
Twenty-First Century Labor Law: Striking The Right Balance Between Workplace Civility Rules That Accommodate Equal Employment Opportunity Obligations And The Loss Of Protection For Concerted Activities Under The National Labor Relations Act, Christine Neylon O'Brien
William & Mary Business Law Review
Employees who engage in protected concerted activities relating to work generally are shielded from discipline by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Where otherwise protected work-related activity involves profanity or offensive speech or actions, whether in or out of the workplace, on a picket line, or on social media, such may violate employer civility rules and/or equal employment opportunity laws. Important interests are at stake, including for employers to maintain a safe, discrimination-free workplace; and for employees to exercise their right to communicate about workplace matters. This Article analyzes recent cases on the question when offensive employee …