Law Commons^™

Distinguishing Disparate Treatment From Disparate Impact; Confusion On The Court, Michael C. Harper

Faculty Scholarship

In two decisions in the 2014-2015 Term, Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, Inc., the Court seemed to give contradictory answers to an important unresolved conceptual definitional question: Does disparate treatment include assigning members of a protected group based on their protected status to a larger disfavored group that is defined by neutral principles and that includes others who are not members of the protected group? Or does such assignment have only a disparate impact on the protected status group?

In Young, the first of these decisions, all members of the …

Meritor Savings Bank V. Vinson: The Supreme Court's Recognition Of The Hostile Environment In Sexual Harassment Claims, Victoria T. Bartels

Akron Law Review

This casenote will examine Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson in light of the brief legal history of Title VII sexual harassment claims and will consider the implications of both the Court's holding and its dicta regarding the undecided issues.

Title Vii: Legal Protection Against Sexual Harassment, Arthur J. Marinelli Jr.

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this article is to examine early case law and recent court decisions involving sexual harassment, especially Meritor v. Vinson. The article will discuss employer avoidance of liability under the EEOC guidelines and will urge employers to implement steps to investigate, prohibit, and sensitize supervisors to sexual harassment.

The Respective Burdens Of Proof In Title Vii Cases: Price Waterhouse V. Hopkins Confuses The Issue, Gregory T. Rossi

Akron Law Review

employed women, and other minorities throughout the United States. The opinion has several significant aspects. First, the case defines the respective evidentiary burdens of a plaintiff-employee and defendant-employer in a Title VIP suit, when the plaintiff-employee has shown that the defendant-employer's employment action resulted from a consideration of legitimate and illegitimate factors (i.e., "mixed motive case"). Second, the express allocation of the burdens of proof resolved a conflict among the various Courts of Appeals. Third, the Court failed to issue a majority opinion. This is significant in light of the current republican administration and its influence on what is now …

United Auto Workers V. Johnson Controls, Inc.: One Small Step For Womankind, A. L. Cherry

Akron Law Review

In United Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with the task of deciding whether women's childbearing capacity could be used to limit women's job choices and opportunities within certain industrial/ manufacturing fields. The Court decided that the ability to bear children could be used to so limit women, but only if the employer met a high standard. In Johnson Controls, employees who worked in a toxic work environment sought a determination that their employer's fetal protection policy discriminated on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act …

Liberating Sexual Harassment Law, Lua Kamál Yuille

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Sexual harassment law and the proposed solutions to that paradigm’s deficiencies teach a disheartening and peculiar lesson to women and gender performance minorities: “You may be disadvantaged at work because of your gender or your gender performance nonconformity. Discrimination against you is okay.” This albatross has inexplicably burdened sexual harassment law for the more than thirty-five years since it emerged as a redressable form of unlawful discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This Article coherently explains the reason for it. It makes a simple claim: Sexual harassment law has failed to eradicate workplace gender discrimination, …

Debunking Unequal Burdens, Trivial Violations, Harmless Stereotypes, And Similar Judicial Myths: The Convergence Of Title Vii Literalism, Congressional Intent, And Kantian Dignity Theory, Peter Brandon Bayer

Scholarly Works

Title VII prohibits employers from imposing their racial, sex-based, ethnic, or religiously inspired grooming and appearance standards, even if, in light of widely accepted social conventions, the vast majority would feel exceptionally uncomfortable in the presence of employees who refuse to comport with their employers' discriminatory rules. Indeed, nearly four decades ago, with correct simplicity and directness the Supreme Court recognized Title VII's first principle: "Congress intended to prohibit all practices in whatever form which create inequality in employment opportunity due to discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, or national origin." Therefore, contrary to the harsh dismay expressed …

On Not 'Having It Both Ways' And Still Losing: Reflections On Fifty Years Of Pregnancy Litigation Under Title Vii, Deborah L. Brake

Articles

This article, published in the B.U. Law Review Symposium issue, “The Civil Rights Act of 1964 at 50: Past, Present and Future,” reflects on the past fifty years of conflict and struggle over how to treat pregnancy discrimination under Title VII. Pregnancy has played a pivotal role in debates among feminist legal scholars and women’s rights advocates about the limitations of both the equal treatment and special treatment anti-discrimination frameworks. The article’s title references the much-discussed Wendy W. Williams cautionary note that if we cannot have it “both ways” we need to decide which way we want to have it …

Hoop Dreams Deferred: The Wnba, The Nba, And The Long-Standing Gender Inequity At The Game’S Highest Level, N. Jeremy Duru

Utah Law Review

From the beginning, the WNBA—which was born of the NBA’s approval in the NBA’s cities with NBA teams’ colors and largely NBA-related names and which survived a challenge from the ABL by virtue of its NBA affiliation—has featured a more stringent age eligibility rule than the NBA. When taken together, the two rules create two different tracks—one for men and one for women—to be negotiated on route to a professional basketball career in the United States. This sort of dualtracking, in which one route presents advantages over the other, is unacceptable in a nation committed to gender equity, and it …

Coercing Assimilation: The Case Of Muslim Women Of Color, Sahar F. Aziz

Faculty Scholarship

Today, I have been asked to address the domestic context of civil rights issues facing Muslim women in the United States. Admittedly, examining the experiences of Muslim American women is a risky endeavor because they are such a diverse group of women ethnically, racially, socio-economically, and religiously in terms of their levels of religiosity. Hence, I acknowledge the risk of essentializing, despite my best efforts to recognize the individual agency of each Muslim woman.

This lecture is based on a larger project that examines the myriad ways Muslim women are adversely affected by their intersectional identities, and how it impacts …

Disparate Impact And Pregnancy: Title Vii's Other Accommodation Requirement, Camille Hébert

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.