Labor and Employment Law Commons^™

Branded: Corporate Image, Sexual Stereotyping, And The New Face Of Capitalism, Dianne Avery, Marion Crain

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

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 …

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 …

Students And Workers And Prisoners - Oh, My! A Cautionary Note About Excessive Institutional Tailoring Of First Amendment Doctrine, Scott A. Moss

Publications

First Amendment free speech doctrine has been called "institutionally oblivious" for ignoring how different institutions present different legal questions. This Article analyzes a little-discussed phenomenon in the growing literature about institutional context in constitutional law. With certain institutions, the situation is not institutional obliviousness but the opposite: extreme institutional tailoring of speech doctrine. The burden of proof ordinarily is on the government to justify speech restrictions, but in three institutions--public schools, workplaces, and prisons--courts allow heavy speech restrictions and defer to government officials. Even if these institutions need to restrict speech unusually often, why do we need different doctrine--institutionally tailored …

Guiry V. Goldman, Sachs & Co., Adam B. Hahn

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Sector Employee Bargaining: Contract Negotiations And Case Law, Andrew Douglas

Cleveland State Law Review

Between 1973 and 1980, across Ohio there were 428 public employee labor actions. In the face of such labor unrest, coupled with changing times and changing attitudes, the lawmakers of Ohio began to recognize the desperate need of the state's public employees to be granted the right to bargain collectively with their employers. It is my hope that after reading this Article, based upon an academically defensible presentation, you will draw the conclusion that collective bargaining for employees in the public sector is a good thing and should be protected at all costs in and by the law.