Law Commons^™

Tempering Title Vii's Straight Arrow Approach: Recognizing And Protecting Gay Victims Of Employment Discrimination, Marie E. Peluso

Vanderbilt Law Review

Consider the following scenario: Jerry, an outstanding graduate of Superior University's business school, has worked for Moneytree & Cashdollar, a prestigious investment banking firm, for three years. In that period, Jerry's hard work and keen instincts helped increase Moneytree's revenues by several million dollars. In addition, Jerry received two awards for landing important new clients. The firm's managing partners have discussed promoting Jerry to junior vice president, an executive position typically reserved for qualified fifth year employees. Jerry's supervisors and peers enthusiastically commend his dedication and skill. Two weeks before the vote on his promotion, Jerry lured a particularly valuable …

Rodrigo's Second Chronicle: The Economics And Politics Of Race, Richard Delgado

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws by Richard Epstein

Filling An Enforcement Void: Using Testers To Uncover And Remedy Discrimination In Hiring For Lower-Skilled, Entry-Level Jobs, Michael J. Yelnosky

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this Article concludes that the current enforcement scheme under Title VII has resulted in underenforcement of the Act in the context of hiring for lower-skilled, entry-level jobs and that testers should be used to fill that enforcement void. Part II agrees with the EEOC's conclusion that testers have standing to sue under Title VII.

Parts III and IV assert that the EEOC cannot rely on private testers to fill the enforcement void. First, under current doctrine, prevailing testers can obtain only "de minimis" or "technical" relief from an offending employer and therefore cannot recover attorneys' fees. Moreover, …

Tester Standing In Employment Discrimination Cases Under 42 U.S.C. 1981, Michelle Landever

Cleveland State Law Review

There is little direct evidence about the nature and extent of hiring discrimination in the United States. There is no empirical evidence that discrimination has been eliminated; and even across the political spectrum there is recognition that the problem still persists. As many more claims pertaining to promotions and terminations are filed, there is a misperception that these reflect a more serious problem than that of hiring discrimination. Victims of hiring discrimination are less likely to know that they have been discriminated against, and to have access to information needed to prove it. Thus, as discrimination at the hiring stage …