Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Antidiscrimination (1)
- Armour & Co. v. Wantock (1)
- Chinese Americans (1)
- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (1)
- Colorblindness (1)
-
- Critical race praxis (1)
- Employee burden (1)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (1)
- Ho v. San Francisco Unified School District (1)
- Interracial justice (1)
- Minimum wage (1)
- Minority (1)
- NAACP (1)
- Overtime (1)
- Political lawyering (1)
- Post-civil rights (1)
- Postmodern (1)
- Progressive race theory (1)
- Reconstruction (1)
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co. (1)
- Title VII (1)
- United Minorities v. San Francisco (1)
- Work (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
On-Call Time Under The Fair Labor Standards Act, Eric Phillips
On-Call Time Under The Fair Labor Standards Act, Eric Phillips
Michigan Law Review
Economic pressures, changing family structures, and technology have increasingly blurred the line between work time and personal time. The rise of independent contracting, the growing number of families in which both parents work, and the. expanding reach of computer networks, fax machines, pagers, and mobile telephones, to provide a few examples, have blurred the once-familiar distinction between work time and leisure time. This distinction is particularly unclear for on-call employees. An on-call employee is one who may be physically away from the workplace but who remains connected to it by telephone, beeper, computer, or radio, and who must respond to …
Critical Race Praxis: Race Theory And Political Lawyering Practice In Post-Civil Rights America, Eric K. Yamamoto
Critical Race Praxis: Race Theory And Political Lawyering Practice In Post-Civil Rights America, Eric K. Yamamoto
Michigan Law Review
At the end of the twentieth century, the legal status of Chinese Americans in San Francisco's public schools turns on a requested judicial finding that a desegregation order originally designed to dismantle a system subordinating nonwhites now invidiously discriminates against Chinese Americans. Brian Ho, Patrick Wong, and Hilary Chen, plaintiffs in Ho v. San Francisco Unified School District, represent "all [16,000] children of Chinese descent" eligible to attend San Francisco's public schools. Their high-profile suit, filed by small-firm attorneys, challenges the validity of a 1983 judicial consent decree desegregating San Francisco's schools. Approved in response to an NAACP class action …