Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Contributory Disparate Impacts In Employment Discrimination Law, Peter Siegelman
Contributory Disparate Impacts In Employment Discrimination Law, Peter Siegelman
William & Mary Law Review
An employer who adopts a facially neutral employment practice that disqualifies a larger proportion of protected-class applicants than others is liable under a disparate impact theory. Defendants can escape liability if they show that the practice is justified by business necessity. But demonstrating business necessity requires costly validation studies that themselves impose a significant burden on defendants-upwards of $100,000 according to some estimates. This Article argues that an employer should have a defense against disparate impact liability if it can show that protected-class applicants failed to make reasonable efforts to train or prepare for a job related test. That is, …
Petruska V. Gannon University: A Crack In The Stained Glass Ceiling, Sarah Fulton
Petruska V. Gannon University: A Crack In The Stained Glass Ceiling, Sarah Fulton
William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice
An examination of the protections afforded to religious institutions in their hiring decisions. Both § 702 of the Civil Rights Act and the judicially created ministerial exception allow churches to use criteria that other employers are not permitted to use under the law when making hiring decisions. Beginning with McClure v. Salvation Army, courts have slowly expanded the scope of these protections, leading up to the recent case of Petruska v. Gannon University. Petruska provides an example of the extent to which a broad reading of § 702 and the ministerial exception can harm religious workers. The opinion of Judge …
The Mythic 43 Million Americans With Disabilities, Ruth Colker
The Mythic 43 Million Americans With Disabilities, Ruth Colker
William & Mary Law Review
Although Congress stated in its first statutory finding that it intended the Americans with DisabilitiesA ct (ADA) to protect at least 43 million Americans from disability discrimination, the Supreme Court has interpreted this statute so that it covers no more than 13.5 million Americans. More importantly, this Article demonstrates through the use of Census Bureau data that the ADA's employment discrimination provisions have been eviscerated to the point that the ADA protects virtually no Americans who are both disabled and able to work. This Article places that problem in the larger context of the Court undermining Congress's efforts to protect …
Discrimination And Outrage: The Migration From Civil Rights To Tort Law, Martha Chamallas
Discrimination And Outrage: The Migration From Civil Rights To Tort Law, Martha Chamallas
William & Mary Law Review
It is not always appreciated that proven discrimination on the basis of race or sex may not amount to a tort and that even persistent racial or sexual harassment may not be enough to qualify for tort recovery. This Article explores the question of whether discriminatory and harassing conduct in the workplace is or should be considered outrageous conduct, actionable under the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress. In recent years, courts have taken radically different approaches to the issue, from holding that such claims are preempted to treating the infliction tort as a reinforcement of civil rights principles. …