Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Coercion, Contract And Free Labor In The Nineteenth Century (A Response To Gunther Peck), Robert J. Steinfeld
Coercion, Contract And Free Labor In The Nineteenth Century (A Response To Gunther Peck), Robert J. Steinfeld
Journal Articles
No abstract provided.
Mcdonnell Douglas, 1973-2003: May You Rest In Peace?, William Corbett
Mcdonnell Douglas, 1973-2003: May You Rest In Peace?, William Corbett
Journal Articles
No abstract provided.
Musical Courts: Plaintiff Picks A Court But Can Defendant Trump The Choice? An Analysis Of Breuer V. Jim's Concrete Of Brevard, Inc., Barbara J. Fick
Musical Courts: Plaintiff Picks A Court But Can Defendant Trump The Choice? An Analysis Of Breuer V. Jim's Concrete Of Brevard, Inc., Barbara J. Fick
Journal Articles
This article previews the Supreme Court case Brewer v. Jim's Concrete of Brevard, 538 U.S. 691 (2003). The author expected the Court to address the issue of whether the language of the Fair Labor Standards Act providing that "an action . . . may be maintained in any federal or state court" constitutes an express provision prohibiting removal to federal court when the plaintiff has chosen to maintain its lawsuit in state court.
Caring For Workers (Symposium On Law, Labor, And Gender), Martha T. Mccluskey
Caring For Workers (Symposium On Law, Labor, And Gender), Martha T. Mccluskey
Journal Articles
No abstract provided.
Mixed Up About Mixed Motive: What Will Trigger A "Mixed Motive" Analysis In Title Vii Cases? An Analysis Of Desert Palace, Inc. V. Costa, Barbara J. Fick
Mixed Up About Mixed Motive: What Will Trigger A "Mixed Motive" Analysis In Title Vii Cases? An Analysis Of Desert Palace, Inc. V. Costa, Barbara J. Fick
Journal Articles
This article previews the Supreme Court case Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 2003. The author expected the Court to clarify and define the circumstances in which it is appropriate to use the "mixed-motive model" to prove a violation of Title VII under the disparate treatment theory.
License To Harass Women: Requiring Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment To Be “Severe Or Pervasive” Discriminates Among “Terms And Conditions Of Employment, Judith J. Johnson
License To Harass Women: Requiring Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment To Be “Severe Or Pervasive” Discriminates Among “Terms And Conditions Of Employment, Judith J. Johnson
Journal Articles
Title VII was intended to remedy discrimination; thus, it is ironic that the courts themselves discriminate among "terms and conditions of employment" by treating hostile environment discrimination less favorably, most commonly in sexual harassment cases. As the Supreme Court said in its first sexual harassment case, hostile environment harassment must be "severe or pervasive" to be actionable. However, many lower courts have used this language to excuse harassment against women. This Article suggests that the problem originates in the Court's continued use of the phrase "severe or pervasive" to describe actionable conduct. This rather dramatic terminology in fact overstates the …