Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Cause For Concern Or Cause For Celebration?: Did Bostock V. Clayton County Establish A New Mixed Motive Theory For Title Vii Cases And Make It Easier For Plaintiffs To Prove Discrimination Claims?, Terrence Cain
Faculty Scholarship
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an employee “because of” race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This seems simple enough, but if an employer makes an adverse employment decision partly for an impermissible reason and partly for a permissible reason, i.e., if the employer acts with a mixed motive, has the employer acted “because of” the impermissible reason? According to Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the answer is no. The Courts in Gross and Nassar held that …
Innovations In Collective Bargaining: Nummi - Driven To Excellence, Marley S. Weiss
Innovations In Collective Bargaining: Nummi - Driven To Excellence, Marley S. Weiss
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Patriarchy, Paternalism, And The Masks Of Fetal Protection., A. Kimberley Dayton
Patriarchy, Paternalism, And The Masks Of Fetal Protection., A. Kimberley Dayton
Faculty Scholarship
This essay is a response to John Kennedy's defense of Johnson Controls, Inc.'s fetal protection policy which was struck down last year in International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc. A unanimous Supreme Court held in the case that the policy, which excluded women from a "fetotoxic" workplace, violated the federal employment discrimination laws. The Court's decision was issued only a day before Kennedy was scheduled to debate the issue of whether Title VII bars fetal protection policies with Professor Elinor Schroeder at the Kansas Journal's first symposium on March 21-22. 1991. The Court's decision rendered the technical statutory issues …