Law Commons^™

Sex Discrimination In Pension And Retirement Annuity Plans After Arizona Governing Committee V. Norris: Recognizing And Remedying Employer Non-Compliance, Mary L. Heen

Law Faculty Publications

This article is intended to help employees and practitioners determine whether an employer's pension or annuity plan violates Title VII, and if so, to identify the scope of relief which may be obtained. Part I discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris. Part II discusses the various types of pension and retirement plans, and describes how to identify sex discrimination in typical plans. Part ill briefly addresses the more difficult question of how to remedy employer non-compliance, and discusses the relief issues raised by both retirees and present employees (with reagard to benefits based on post-Norris …

On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Applying Restitution To Remedy A Discriminatory Denial Of Partnership, Candace Kovacic-Fleischer

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This article suggests that a plaintiff can bring a state cause of action in restitution, liability in unjust enrichment, as an alternative to a federal cause of action in Title VII if the plaintiff was discriminatorily denied partnership by a firm that paid her a salary, but billed her time by the hour to clients. If the firm earned more than it paid in salary and overhead to the plaintiff, that amount would be defendant’s gain, one of the elements of an action in restitution, and the amount to be disgorged should plaintiff prove the other two elements, that the …

Differentiating Sex From Sex: The Male Irresistible Impulse, Jane H. Aiken

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The courts have not wholeheartedly embraced the idea of equality of the sexes, and therefore do not attack sex discrimination with the same vigor as they attack racism. Rather, the courts are equivocal about sexual equality and weigh equality less carefully for sex than for race. Color is thought an arbitrary distinction; gender, however, is assumed to be something of substance.

When courts sustain sex discrimination, they generally do not characterize it as such. Rather, differences between the sexes, both real and imagined, are used to justify the gender distinction. It is easy to be hypnotized by the purported differences …

Sex-Based Wage Discrimination Under The Title Vii Disparate Impact Doctrine, Mark B. Seidenfeld

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Norris V. Arizona Governing Committee: Titile Vii's Applicability To Arizona's Deferred Compensation Plan, Mary E. Berkheiser

Scholarly Works

Analysis of Norris v. Arizona Governing Comm., 671 F.2d 330 (9^th Cir. 1982).

Sex Discrimination In Coaching, R. Lawrence Dessem

Faculty Publications

This article will attempt to provide a legal framework for analysis of this not uncommon payment of lower salaries or stipends to the teacher-coaches (both male and female) of girls' athletics than to the teacher-coaches of comparable or identical boys' sports.

Equality For Individuals Or Equality For Groups: Implications Of The Supreme Court Decision In The Manhart Case, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This commentary breaks down the case of the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power v. Manhart and discusses what effects the Supreme Court's decision will have when Title VII is applied to university employers, particularly in their relationship with TIAA-CREF

The Thirteenth And Fourteenth Amendments: Constitutional Authority For Federal Legislation Against Private Sex Discrimination, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Emerging Constitutional Principle Of Sexual Equality, Julius G. Getman

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.