Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Elevator Company Goes Down: Mandatory Arbitration Provisions As Applied To Pending Civil Rights Claims In The Employment Context, Miranda Fleschert
Elevator Company Goes Down: Mandatory Arbitration Provisions As Applied To Pending Civil Rights Claims In The Employment Context, Miranda Fleschert
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Company, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals carved a distinction in the employment context between mandatory predispute arbitration agreements and compulsory arbitration agreements as applied to pending claims of discrimination. In doing so, the court warns employers that any effort to terminate an employee's rights with respect to a pending Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") claim by instituting a mandatory arbitration provision will be seen as impermissibly retaliatory. Amid the backdrop of a case in which supervisors routinely called black employees "monkeys," "slaves," and "niggers," the court makes a well-meaning attempt at preserving employees' statutorily …
Knowing And Voluntary Standard: Is The Sixth Circuit's Test Enough To Level The Playing Field In Mandatory Employment Arbitration, The, Christina Semmer
Knowing And Voluntary Standard: Is The Sixth Circuit's Test Enough To Level The Playing Field In Mandatory Employment Arbitration, The, Christina Semmer
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Most courts require that for an individual to waive her Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury, she must knowingly and voluntarily waive that right. This heightened requirement for waiver exists because the United States Supreme Court has found that "[tlhe trial by jury is justly dear to the American people... and every encroachment upon it has been watched with great jealousy." Seemingly this standard should apply to mandatory employment arbitration agreements, as shifting the venue from the courts to the arbitral tribunal implicitly means waiving the right to trial by jury. However, because the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") requires …
The Application Of Rfra To Override Employment Nondiscrimination Clauses Embedded In Federal Social Services Programs, Carl H. Esbeck
The Application Of Rfra To Override Employment Nondiscrimination Clauses Embedded In Federal Social Services Programs, Carl H. Esbeck
Faculty Publications
General federal employment nondiscrimination legislation permits religious organizations to take religion into account when making employment decisions. However, some federal social service programs have embedded in their authorizing legislation a nondiscrimination clause binding on recipients of program grants. And a few of these embedded clauses require that grantees (including religious grantees) not discriminate in employment on the basis of religion. This extended essay demonstrates how the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 overrides these employment nondiscrimination clauses when applied to faith-based social service grantees. Not only is this the conclusion of the U.S. Department of Justice in its policy announced …
Pragmatism Over Politics: Recent Trends In Lower Court Employment Discrimination Jurisprudence, Lee Reeves
Pragmatism Over Politics: Recent Trends In Lower Court Employment Discrimination Jurisprudence, Lee Reeves
Missouri Law Review
This Article has five parts. After considering empirical evidence, Part I concludes that judges' political ideology plays only a limited role in their decisionmaking. Part II identifies the increase in case filings over the last two decades as a likely non-ideological cause of the increased judicial skepticism towards claims of employment discrimination. This Part begins by examining aggregate trends in the district and appellate caseload and then translates caseload into the more meaningful metric of workload. Part II next evaluates various steps courts have taken to handle these workload increases. Finally, Part II concludes with a discussion of why employment …
Unreasonable - Missouri Rejects A Reasonable Person Standard For Determining Co-Employee Liability Under Badami's Something More Test, Richard D. Worth
Unreasonable - Missouri Rejects A Reasonable Person Standard For Determining Co-Employee Liability Under Badami's Something More Test, Richard D. Worth
Missouri Law Review
Missouri's workers' compensation law has changed dramatically since its common law inception. Co-employee liability for injuries caused to fellow employees has shadowed this change. At common law, employers were not liable for injuries to their employees caused by the actions of fellow employees. However, Missouri's adoption of the Workers' Compensation Act in 1926 shifted the burden of liability for work-related injuries from employees to employers and the general public. Although employers now bear the burden of work-related injures to their employees, Missouri has continued to recognize co-employee liability, but only under limited circumstances. For an employee to lose immunity from …