Labor and Employment Law Commons^™

The Effect Of Pegram V. Herdrich On Hmo Liability, Dawn Marie Kelly

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Law Of The Platform, Orly Lobel

Faculty Scholarship

New digital platform companies are turning everything into an available resource: services, products, spaces, connections, and knowledge, all of which would otherwise be collecting dust. Unsurprisingly then, the platform economy defies conventional regulatory theory. Millions of people are becoming part-time entrepreneurs, disrupting established business models and entrenched market interests, challenging regulated industries, and turning ideas about consumption, work, risk, and ownership on their head. Paradoxically, as the digital platform economy becomes more established, we are also at an all-time high in regulatory permitting, licensing, and protection. The battle over law in the platform is therefore both conceptual and highly practical. …

Special Treatment Stigma After The Ada Amendments Act, Nicole Buonocore Porter

Pepperdine Law Review

This article explores a unique source of stigma suffered by individuals with disabilities in the workplace. Instead of focusing on those with the most stigmatizing disabilities, I focus on those individuals who have disabilities that are not perceived as very severe, yet they still suffer stigma. These individuals are stigmatized because of the special treatment they receive (or are perceived as receiving) through workplace accommodations provided pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In prior work, I have called this phenomenon “special treatment stigma,” the harm that arises from receiving special treatment in the workplace, especially when co-workers believe …

Goodwin V. Jones, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (Mar. 03, 2016), Rob Schmidt

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court of Appeals held that because the employee did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate she made a reasonable, good-faith attempt to maintain her certification, the employee’s failure to maintain certification required by her employer constituted misconduct within the meaning of NRS 612.385.

Is Religious Liberty The Ultimate Management Prerogative?: Some Reflections On Pacific Lutheran University And Service Employees International Union, Local 925, David L. Gregory

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Contraceptive Coverage Falls, No More: Using Rfra To Limit The Scope Of Religious Challenges To The Aca's Contraceptive Mandate, M. Catherine Norman

Mercer Law Review

Contraceptive coverage is a required part of all new insurance plans under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), but many employers' are exempt from this requirement. Other employers have challenged the contraceptive requirement on religious grounds. In East Texas Baptist University v. Burwell, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held as follows: (1) the plaintiffs are either automatically exempt from the contraceptive-coverage mandate or eligible for accommodation upon application; (2) the challenged provisions do not violate rights to religious freedom under the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA); (3) RFRA applies only to …

The Nba's New Media Rights Deal: A Look Into The Multi-Billion Dollar Cause Of What May Become The Next Nba Lockout, Brandon S. Ross

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

This Is Just Not Working For Us: Why After Ten Years On The Job It Is Time To Fire Garcetti, Jason Zenor

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

In Lane v. Franks, the U.S. Supreme Court held that public employees who give truthful testimony in court are protected so long as it was outside their ordinary job duties. This issue arose after ten years of the Garcetti rule which does not protect employee speech pursuant to their job duties- a nebulous topic in the digital era. In applying Garcetti, lower courts have extended it to include any speech that is a product of job duties, even if it would serve the public interest. In Lane v. Franks, the Court amended the employee speech doctrine to protect …

Piecing Together The Puzzle: Analyzing The Collision Of The Aca And Erisa, Luke Kalamas

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Restrictive Covenants Under New York Law: The Court Of Appeals Weighs In On Choice Of Law Provisions And Partial Enforcement, Jyotin Hamid, Tricia Sherno

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Unites States V. Windsor, Obergefell V. Hodges And The Future Of Lgbt Rights In The Workplace, Sarah Wheeler

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

This Is Just Not Working For Us: Why After Ten Years On The Job- It Is Time To Fire Garcetti, Jason Zenor

Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest

In Lane v. Franks, the U.S. Supreme Court held that public employees who give truthful testimony in court are protected so long as it was outside their ordinary job duties. This issue arose after ten years of the Garcetti rule which does not protect employee speech pursuant to their job duties- a nebulous topic in the digital era. In applying Garcetti, lower courts have extended it to include any speech that is a product of job duties, even if it would serve the public interest. In Lane v. Franks, the Court amended the employee speech doctrine to protect …

Confusion On The Court: Distinguishing Disparate Treatment From Disparate Impact In Young V. Ups And Eeoc V. Abercrombie & Fitch, Inc., 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 …

Be Careful What You Wish For: Why Hobby Lobby Weakens Religious Freedom, Frank S. Ravitch

BYU Law Review

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., which brought for-profit corporations under the protection of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, has been the subject of widespread support and criticism. Some have lauded the Hobby Lobby decision as an important step in protecting religious freedom. Others have derided it as an affront to the civil rights of corporate employees. This Article suggests a third perspective, namely, that Hobby Lobby harms, rather than helps, religious freedom. Both legally and politically, Hobby Lobby is likely to lead to a reduction in protection for religious individuals and entities …

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: The Lack Of Protection For Volunteers Under Federal Anti-Discrimination Statutes, Lawrence D. Rosenthal

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Whistling In Silence: The Implications Of Arbitration On Qui Tam Claims Under The False Claims Act, Mathew Andrews

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

For nearly twenty years, corporate defendants have sought unsuccessfully to use arbitration to roll back protections for whistleblowers suing under federal law. The state and federal judiciaries have long stymied these efforts, on the grounds that defendants cannot force the Government's claims into the secretive forum of arbitration. In January 2013, this protection came to an end. A federal court ruled for the first time that a whistleblower suing on behalf of the United States must pursue its action in arbitration. Five months later, this trend continued as federal courts have compelled arbitration of state law qui tam actions. This …

The Lawyer's Obligation To Correct Social Injustice!, James F. Gill

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Madonnas And Whores In The Workplace, Jessica Fink

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

Much has been written about “lookism”—the preferential treatment given to those who conform to societal standards of beauty. But in a recent case before the Iowa Supreme Court, a sex discrimination plaintiff alleged “reverse-lookism,” claiming that her male employer terminated her long-term employment because she was too physically attractive, thus tempting the employer to consider entering into an extramarital affair. To the great surprise of many who followed this case, the Iowa Supreme Court sided with the employer, declining to find him liable for sex discrimination. As one might expect, uproar ensued, with the media, the public, and the academic …

Jack & Jill Take Lots Of Pills, But Jill Comes Tumbling After: Gender Inequality In Privately Funded Early Phase Clinical Trials, Shana F. Oppenheim

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights-Newspaper Advertisements For Employment Opportunities Located In South Africa, Which Do Not On Their Face Recite Discriminatory Conditions, Do Not Violate Municipal Anti-Discrimination Laws, Nancy L. Rumble

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.