Law Commons^™

Beyond Title Vii: Litigating Harassment By Nonemployees Under The Ada And Adea, Kate Bradley

Washington Law Review

Employees in the United States are protected from unlawful harassment that rises to the level of a “hostile work environment.” Federal circuits recognize that employers could be liable under Title VII when their employees experience hostile work environments because of harassment from nonemployees. However, outside of Title VII, not all federal circuits have recognized that the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protect employees from hostile work environments.

As a result, employees are vulnerable with respect to age and disability-based harassment. This Comment argues that all federal circuits should allow …

Transparency And Reliance In Antidiscrimination Law, Steven L. Willborn

Catholic University Law Review

All antidiscrimination laws have two structural features – transparency and reliance – that are important, even central, to their design, but have gone largely unnoticed. On transparency, some laws, like the recent salary-ban laws, attempt to prevent the employer from learning about the disfavored factor on the theory that an employer cannot rely on an unknown factor. Other laws require publication of the disfavored factor, such as salary, on the theory that it is harder to discriminate in the sunlight. Still other laws are somewhere between these two extremes. The Americans with Disabilities Act, for example, limits but does not …

It's Alright, Ma, It's Life And Life Only: Have Universities Been Meeting Their Legal Obligations To High-Risk Faculty During The Pandemic?, Gary J. Simson, Mark L. Jones, Cathren K. Page, Suzianne D. Painter-Thorne

Pepperdine Law Review

Even those universities most firmly committed to returning to in-person instruction in fall semester 2020 recognized that for health reasons some exceptions would need to be made. The CDC had identified two groups—people age sixty-five and over and people with certain medical conditions—as persons "at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19," and it had spelled out various special precautions they should take to avoid contracting the virus. Given the CDC's unique stature, universities very reasonably could have been expected to grant exceptions to faculty falling into either group, but that's not what many universities did. We argue that, properly …

Does The Adea's Federal-Sector Provision Require A Plaintiff To Prove That Age Was A But-For Cause Of The Challenged Personnel Action?, Anne M. Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Age Discrimination In The On-Demand Economy And Crowdwork, Miriam A. Cherry

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The dominant narrative about the on-demand or gig economy focuses on the plight of Millennials, the generation born between 1982 and 2004. Reporters, bloggers, and commentators have largely confined their account of gig platforms to what the on-demand economy means for Millennials who are just beginning their careers. Media sources have spotlighted the hardships facing young, tech-savvy workers who are forced to cobble together a living through a combination of part-time work, entrepreneurial activities, and insecure gigs online. These sources note that these Millennials are barely scraping by and often lack job security or benefits. When discussing the problems …

The Federalism Cases, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discrimination Law: The New Franken-Tort, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

This article was part of the Clifford Symposium in Tort Law. The article discusses how the Supreme Court has used tort law to define certain elements of discrimination law, but has not described all of the elements of this new tort. The article is the first one to try to piece together the new "tort" created by the Supreme Court.

No Country For Old Men?: The Non-Preclusive Effect Of The Age Discrimination In Employment Act On § 1983 Age Discrimination Claims, Lauren Tauro

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues that the ADEA should not be interpreted to preclude § 1983 constitutional claims for age discrimination in employment. Part I of this Note discusses the history and development of the statutory schemes that provide protection for employees against age discrimination in the workplace: § 1983 of the Civil Rights Act and the ADEA. Part II reviews relevant case law explaining the arguments for and against § 1983 preclusion to illustrate the interaction between § 1983 and the ADEA. Finally, Part III provides an equitable approach for courts to use to analyze § 1983 claims for age …

The Gross Beast Of Burden Of Proof: Experimental Evidence On How The Burden Of Proof Influences Employment Discrimination Case Outcomes, David Sherwyn, Michael Heise

Michael Heise

Scholarly and public attention to the burden of proof and jury instructions has increased dramatically since the Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. Gross holds that the so-called mixed-motive jury instruction, which we call the motivating factor instruction, is not available in age, and possibly disability and retaliation cases. The decision prompted an outcry from the plaintiffs' bar and Congress has proposed legislation to overturn Gross. Despite the outcry, a simple question persists: Does the motivating factor jury instruction influence case outcomes? Results from our experimental mock jury study suggest that such jury instructions do …

Life-Cycle Justice: Accommodating Just Cause And Employment At Will, Stewart J. Schwab

Stewart J Schwab

No abstract provided.

Retaliation And The Reasonable Person, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

When a worker complains about discrimination, federal law is supposed to protect that worker from later retaliation. Recent scholarly attention focuses on how courts limit retaliation claims by narrowly framing the causation inquiry. A larger threat to retaliation law is developing in the lower courts. Courts are declaring a wide swath of conduct as insufficiently serious to constitute retaliation.

Many courts hold that it is legal for an employer to threaten to fire a worker, to place the worker on administrative leave, or to negatively evaluate the worker because she complained about discriminatory conduct. Even if the worker has evidence …

Age Discrimination--Extraterritorial Application Of The Age Discrimination In Employment Act--Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Determines That A United States Corporation Operating In West Germany Is Subject To Suit Under The Age Discrimination In Employment Act--Employer's Defense Based On Compliance With West German Law Rejected, Chris Lauderdale

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Comments On The Agency And Its Role In Employment Discrimination Law, Mary Kathryn Lynch

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court Chipping Away At Title Vii: Strengthening It Or Killing It?, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

Whether the Court's chipping away at Title VII is an attempt to make Title VII into a 21st century diamond, or an attempt to make it a 21st century pile of diamond dust, or merely an attempt to interpret Title VII consistent with its text is a matter of opinion. This Article explores how the Court is interpreting and reinterpreting Title VII and necessarily considers whether the Court's reinterpretation will likely reinvigorate or damage Title VII' s broad goal of workplace equality. This Article tentatively considers what may be next for Title VII. Part I briefly discusses Title VII's scope. …

The Tort Label, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Courts and commentators often label federal discrimination statutes as torts. Since the late 1980s, the courts increasingly applied tort concepts to these statutes. This Article discusses how courts placed employment discrimination law within the organizational umbrella of tort law without examining whether the two areas share enough theoretical and doctrinal affinities.

While discrimination statutes are torts in some general sense that they do not arise out of criminal law and are not solely contractual, it is far from clear that these statutes are enough like traditional torts to justify the reflexive and automatic use of tort law. Employment discrimination statutes …

Let's Pretend Discrimination Is A Tort, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In the past decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly invoked tort common law to interpret federal discrimination statutes. During this same time period, the Supreme Court increasingly invoked textualism as the appropriate methodology for interpreting these statutes. One immediate effect of these two trends - tortification and textualism - is to restrict discrimination law by tightening causal standards.

This Article explores how interpreting discrimination statutes through the lenses of tort law and textualism can expand, rather than restrict, discrimination law. It assumes that courts will continue to characterize discrimination statutes as torts and as deriving from the common law, despite …

Torts And Civil Rights Law: Migration And Conflict: Symposium Introduction, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Curiously, the connection between civil rights and civil wrongs has not been a topic that has captivated the attention of large numbers of legal scholars over the years. The distance that has developed between the two fields likely reflects their placement on opposite sides of the public-private divide, with Title VII and other anti-discrimination statutes forming part of public law, while torts is a classic, private law subject. To compound the division, both subjects are to some extent still under-theorized. Employment discrimination scholarship is often caught up in the process of analyzing the doctrinal implications of the latest Supreme Court …

Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2007 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

Labor And Employment Law, Eric Wallace

Law Student Publications

During the past two years, there have been several significant developments in labor and employment law, both on the state and federal levels. Because developments in both state and federal law likely will have a profound impact on employers and employees throughout Virginia, they warrant significant discussion in this survey. In addition to examining notable decisions from the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the United States District Courts for the Eastern District and Western District of Virginia, this survey also discusses decisions of the Supreme Court of Virginia …

Employment Discrimination Decisions From The October 2008 Term, Drew S. Days Iii

Touro Law Review

Several employment discrimination decisions were handed down this Term. They were Ricci v.DeStefano (Title VII); Gross v.FBL Financial Services, Inc. (Age Discrimination in Employment Act); AT & T Corp. v. Hulteen (Pregnancy Discrimination Act); and 14 Penn Plaza L.L. C. v. Pyett, which concerned the impact of arbitration agreements upon the reach of federal employment discrimination laws.

The Proper Preclusion Standard: Why The Adea Is Not The Exclusive Remedy For Age Discrimination In Employment, Murray A. Duncan Iii

Seventh Circuit Review

Imagine that you work for the Department of Transportation for the state. You are fifty-five years old and have been working for the Department for over twenty years. One day, you walk into work and your supervisor says, "You're fired: you are too old." Undoubtedly, your employer violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). As mandated by the ADEA, you file a charge of age discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The Commission investigates and grants you the authority to file a civil suit in federal court. In court, the judge informs you that the ADEA is not …

Giving Notice: An Argument For Notification Of Putative Plaintiffs In Complex Litigation, Marjorie A. Silver

Marjorie A. Silver

Professor Silver advocates recognition of an inherent judicial power to send or authorize notice of pending litigation to potentially interested persons with unfiled claims. Recognizing such a judicial power is consistent with recent legal developments establishing a role for judges in expediting and managing federal litigation. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure only explicitly provide for notice to potential parties in Rule 23 class action litigation, Professor Silver demonstrates that a more general judicial power to notify putative plaintiffs is consistent with the federal rules and the Constitution. She also shows that the first amendment values support a judicial …

Employment Discrimination: Recent Developments In The Supreme Court (The Supreme Court And Local Government Law: The 1994-1995 Term), Eileen Kaufman

Eileen Kaufman

No abstract provided.

The Gross Beast Of Burden Of Proof: Experimental Evidence On How The Burden Of Proof Influences Employment Discrimination Case Outcomes, David Sherwyn, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Scholarly and public attention to the burden of proof and jury instructions has increased dramatically since the Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. Gross holds that the so-called mixed-motive jury instruction, which we call the motivating factor instruction, is not available in age, and possibly disability and retaliation cases. The decision prompted an outcry from the plaintiffs' bar and Congress has proposed legislation to overturn Gross. Despite the outcry, a simple question persists: Does the motivating factor jury instruction influence case outcomes? Results from our experimental mock jury study suggest that such jury instructions …

Gross'ed Out: The Seventh Circuit's Over-Extension Of Gross V. Fbl Financial Services Into The Ada Context, Allison P. Sues

Seventh Circuit Review

In its recent decision in Serwatka v. Rockwell Automation, Inc., the Seventh Circuit overruled its prior circuit precedent and found that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not create liability for mixed-motive claims. As a result of this decision, if an employer impermissibly considers an employee's disability in making a decision adverse to the employee, courts will not hold the employer liable provided that the plaintiff cannot also show that such consideration was the but-for cause of the challenged action. Prior to 2009, the Seventh Circuit had recognized mixed-motive causation under the ADA; it relied primarily on Price …

The Emergence Of Mandatory Wellness Programs In The United States: Welcoming, Or Worrisome?, Daniel Charles Rubenstein

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2007 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural Extremism: The Supreme Court's 2008-2009 Labor And Employment Cases, Melissa Hart

Publications

It has become nearly a commonplace to say that the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts is a court of “incrementalism.” The 2008 Term, however, featured several opinions that showcase the procedural extremism of the current conservative majority. In a series of sharply divided decisions, the Court re-shaped the law that governs the workplace - or more specifically the law that governs whether and how employees will be permitted access to the courts to litigate workplace disputes. At least as important as the Court’s changes to the substantive legal standards are the procedural hurdles the five …

Extending Owbpa Notice And Consent Protections To Arbitration Agreements Involving Employees And Consumers, Christopher J. Kippley, Richard A. Bales

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Sky Remains Intact: Why Allowing Subgroup Evidence Is Consistent With The Age Discrimination In Employment Act, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Employers' stereotypes about the effect of age on employment are not consistent across the entire group of individuals age forty and older. It is intuitive to believe that employers may view employees in their forties as being in their employment prime, while believing that employees in their sixties are not.' Likewise, perceptions of age may vary dramatically depending on the age of the decision-maker. Common sense tells us that a supervisor in his or her forties may create policies that are neutral or positive toward individuals in that age range, while either intentionally or unintentionally engaging in employment practices that …