Labor and Employment Law Commons^™

Clearing Civil Procedure Hurdles In The Quest For Justice, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

How Goliath Won: The Future Implications Of Dukes V. Wal-Mart, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

Reinventing The Eeoc, Nancy M. Modesitt

All Faculty Scholarship

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has struggled to be a meaningful force in eradicating employment discrimination since its inception. The primary reasons for this are structural in nature. The EEOC was designed to react to discrimination complaints by investigating and conciliating all of the thousands of complaints filed annually. The EEOC has never been able to investigate all these complaints despite using the vast majority of its resources attempting to do so. The devotion of resources to managing and investigating the huge volume of complaints prevents the EEOC from taking more effective steps to eliminate discrimination. This article proposes …

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 …

Review Of Labor And Employment Decisions From The United States Supreme Court’S 2008–2009 Term, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Todd C. Dvorak

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In its most recently completed Term, the United States Supreme Court decided eight labor and employment law cases of some consequence. The decided cases covered a broad array of labor and employment subjects, including: the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), public sector labor law, and private sector labor law. Practitioners who specialize in a particular area might be tempted to focus on only the cases in their area. Academics might be tempted to try to devise some economic or logical theory …

How Many Plaintiffs Are Enough? Venue In Title Vii Class Actions, Piper Hoffman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article critiques the recent rash of federal district court opinions holding that all named plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must satisfy the venue requirements in the court where they filed the action. Neither the text nor the history of Title VII requires this prevailing interpretation; to the contrary, requiring every named plaintiff to satisfy venue requirements in the same court undermines the legislative purpose behind both Title VII and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 by creating a new obstacle to employees seeking to enforce …

Duty Of Fair Representation Jurisprudential Reform: The Need To Adjudicate Disputes In Internal Union Review Tribunals And The Forgotten Remedy Of Re-Arbitration, Mitchell H. Rubinstein

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

One of the best kept secrets in American labor law is that duty of fair representation jurisprudence simply does not work. It does not work for plaintiff union members because they must satisfy a close-to-impossible burden of proof and have a short statute of limitations window in which to assert their claim. It does not work for defendant unions because they are often forced to file pointless grievances in order to avoid the cost of litigation. It does not work for defendant employers because they are often brought into these lawsuits because they have the "deep pockets."

This Article makes …

Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs In Federal Court: From Bad To Worse?, Kevin M. Clermont, Stewart J. Schwab

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article utilizes the Administrative Office's data to convey the realities of federal employment discrimination litigation. Litigants in these "jobs" cases appeal more often than other litigants, with the defendants doing far better on those appeals than the plaintiffs. These troublesome facts help explain why today fewer plaintiffs are undertaking the frustrating route into federal district court, where plaintiffs must pursue their claims relatively often all the way through trial and where at both pretrial and trial these plaintiffs lose unusually often.

When The Music Stops, Why Not Require Certain Title Vii Plaintiffs To Find A Chair On Which To Rest Their Complaint?, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 505 (2009), Catherine R. Caifano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is The Door Open Or Closed? Evaluating The Future Of The Federal Medical Peer-Review Privilege, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 561 (2009), Ghazal Sharifi

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Matter Of Context: Social Framework Evidence In Employment Discrimination Class Actions, Melissa Hart, Paul M. Secunda

Publications

In litigation disputes over the certification of employment discrimination class actions, social scientists have come to play a central, yet controversial, role. Organizational behavioralists and social psychologists regularly testify for the plaintiffs, offering what is commonly referred to as social framework testimony. These experts explain the general social science research on the operation of stereotyping and bias in decision making and examine the challenged workplace to identify those policies and practices that research has shown will tend to increase and those that will tend to limit the likely impact of these factors. Defendants fight hard against the admission of social …

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 …

Case Note: Golden Gate Restaurant Association V. City And County Of San Francisco: Setting The Stage For Supreme Court Review Of The Most Important Preemption Matter In The History Of Erisa, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 995 (2008), Joshua Waldbeser

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discriminatory Pay And Title Vii: Filing A Timely Claim, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 325 (2008), Megan E. Mowrey

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Asymmetrical Warfare: The Cost Of Electronic Discovery In Employment Litigation, Rodney A. Satterwhite, Matthew J. Quatrara

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

A fundamental tenet of the 2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the “2006 Amendments”) is the notion that parties can agree and cooperate on issues relating to electronic discovery. Many of the rule changes now either require parties to meet and confer about electronic discovery or presuppose a certain level of dialogue between the parties regarding such issues.

The New York City Corporation Counsel: The Best Legal Job In America, Michael A. Cardozo

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Retaliatory Litigation Tactics: The Chilling Effects Of "After-Acquired Evidence", Melissa Hart

Publications

Even a victim of the most egregious discrimination may recover little monetary relief if the defendant discovers, after firing the employee, that she committed some firable offense. Yet the case in which the Supreme Court so held, McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co., was widely viewed as a victory rather than a defeat for plaintiffs. This surprising perception flowed from the Court's holding that such "after-acquired evidence" of misconduct merely limited remedies but did not completely eliminate plaintiffs' rights to sue for discrimination. Given that McKennon could be portrayed either as a victory for plaintiffs or an unjust denial …

Who Is Entitled To Survivor Benefits From Erisa Plans?, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 919 (2007), Albert Feuer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Labor Regulation, Union Avoidance And Organized Labor Relations Strategies On Tribal Lands: New Indian Gaming Strategies In The Wake Of San Manuel Band Of Indians V. National Labor Relations Board, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1259 (2007), D. Michael Mcbride Iii, H. Leonard Court

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Process Is Due In The Adjudication Of Erisa Claims?, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 811 (2007), Mark D. Debofsky

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fighting Discrimination While Fighting Litigation: A Tale Of Two Supreme Courts, Scott A. Moss

Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued an odd mix of pro-plaintiff and pro-defendant employment law rulings. It has disallowed harassment lawsuits against employers even with failed antiharassment efforts, construed statutes of limitations narrowly to bar suits about ongoing promotion and pay discrimination, and denied protection to public employee internal complaints. Yet the same Court has issued significant unanimous rulings easing discrimination plaintiffs' burdens of proof.

This jurisprudence is often miscast in simple pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant terms. The Court's duality traces to its inconsistent and unaware adoption of competing policy arguments:

Policy 1: Employees must try internal dispute resolution before suing--or …

Disparate Impact Discrimination: The Limits Of Litigation, The Possibilities For Internal Compliance, Melissa Hart

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Possibility Of Avoiding Discrimination: Considering Compliance And Liability, Melissa Hart

Publications

The gender discrimination class action Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., whose certification was recently affirmed in the Ninth Circuit, presents a large-scale challenge to the company's excessive reliance on subjective judgment in employment decision-making. It is one in a growing number of similar suits, all of which are fundamentally attacks on the continued operation of entrenched gender stereotypes in the allocation of workplace opportunities. The breadth of this aim is one of the strengths of these suits, but it also raises a significant question: because this kind of litigation targets a broad social phenomenon, is it reasonably possible to …

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

This brief comment suggests where the anti-eminent domain movement might be heading next.

Final Offer Arbitration In The New Era Of Major League Baseball, Spencer B. Gordon

ExpressO

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the economic, athletic, and social impact of final offer salary arbitration in Major League Baseball (“MLB”). The article delves into the motivations, fluctuations, and evolution of the player-owner relationship and free agency. The commentary then focuses on the distinguishing features and intricacies of final offer arbitration. Although salary arbitration in the context of Major League Baseball is a topic oft discussed in the law review setting, the analysis rarely reaches the level exhibited in this article. Moreover, most articles on the subject were written between 1996 and 2000 when the 1994 players’ strike …

Finding New Constitutional Rights Through The Supreme Court’S Evolving “Government Purpose” Test Under Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

By now we all are familiar with the litany of cases which refused to find elevated scrutiny for so-called “affirmative” or “social” rights such as education, welfare or housing: Lindsey v. Normet, San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, Dandridge v. Williams, DeShaney v. Winnebago County. There didn’t seem to be anything in minimum scrutiny which could protect such facts as education or housing, from government action. However, unobtrusively and over the years, the Supreme Court has clarified and articulated one aspect of minimum scrutiny which holds promise for vindicating facts. You will recall that under minimum scrutiny government’s action is …

In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Should The Securities Exchange Act Be The Sole Federal Remedy For An Erisa Fiduciary Misrepresentation Of The Value Of Public Employer Stock?, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 637 (2006), Mark Casciari, Ian Morrison

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Judicial Paradox Of "Equitable" Relief Under Erisa Section 502(A)(3), 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 827 (2006), Colleen E. Medill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.