Gender and the Law Prof Blog

Editor: Tracy A. Thomas
University of Akron School of Law

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Broadening Intent to Include Implicit Bias and Structural Discrimination in Employment

Leora F. Eisenstadt (Temple, B School) & Jeffrey R. Boles (Temple, Dept Legal Studies in Bus), Intent and Liability in Employment Discrimination, American Business L.J. (forthcoming)

Abstract:     

The Silicon Valley Ellen Pao trial brought to the forefront once again the changing nature of discrimination in the workplace with its focus on a culture of bias and the prevalence of unconscious discriminatory behavior. This case is only the most recent high-profile example. There is an emerging consensus among scholars that the concept of “intent” in disparate treatment employment discrimination should be broadened to encapsulate more flexible notions including implicit bias, negligent discrimination, and structural discrimination. These scholars argue convincingly that psychological research demonstrates that implicit bias and reliance on ingrained stereotypes is, to some extent, natural to human decision-making processes. As a result, bias in the workplace operates at both an overt, knowing level but also beneath the surface and, at times, without the conscious knowledge of the decision-makers themselves.

However, despite extensive discussion of implicit bias in the legal literature, few, if any, scholars have considered alterations to liability and compensation schemes as a result of the broader meanings of intent. This article proposes looking to criminal law as a practical and theoretical model for an amendment to Title VII that would include gradations of intent with concomitant gradations in liability. The Model Penal Code presents an orderly and well-thought-out approach to intent, or mens rea, and the gradations of intent that support a finding of guilt. In addition, theory and policy supporting criminal law’s linkage of intent and liability are remarkably analogous to Title VII’s goal of elimination of discrimination. As a result, this article contends that a careful and measured consideration of criminal law’s approach to liability is instructive.

Drawing on the extensive literature on flexible intent and criminal law theories of retributivism and consequentialism, this article proposes a statutory expansion of the definition of disparate treatment discrimination under Title VII with an adjustment in the liability regime based on the level of employer intent. We contend that a clear link between intent level and damages constitutes an attractive balancing of employer and employee needs that should spur this crucial statutory change. A statutory amendment to Title VII that both broadens the meaning of “intent” for disparate treatment claims but also limits liability based on the level of intent offers a compromise position that expands the application of discrimination law to meet changing workplace norms and a theoretically and emotionally satisfying means of accomplishing that change.

 

April 20, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Uncovering the Gendered Nature of Disability Discrimination

Jennifer Bennett Shinall (Vanderbilt), The Substantially Impaired Sex: Uncovering the Gendered Nature of Disability Discrimination, Minnesota L. Rev. (forthcoming).

Abstract:     

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 was a landmark piece of legislation that prohibited private-sector employers from discriminating against qualified disabled workers. Although the Act is over a quarter-century old, legal scholars have never considered whether the Act has been uniformly efficacious — that is, whether the Act has served all subpopulations of disabled workers equally well. This scholarly neglect is surprising, given that prior economics research indicates that the ADA has been less effective for disabled women than for disabled men. This Article steps back and asks why the Act might have resulted in differential effects for men and women. The ADA provides precisely the same remedies for qualified disabled workers, without taking workers’ sex into account. The Act’s approach assumes that disability discrimination is the same (or highly similar) both in nature and in strength for men and women, but this Article questions that assumption. An empirical examination of all ADA charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reveals a negative interaction between disability discrimination and sex: Disabled workers who are in the minority sex within their workplaces are more likely to encounter discrimination than are disabled workers who are in the majority sex. Because many more industries are majority-male than majority-female, the result of this sex-disability interaction is higher overall rates of disability discrimination against women. Using this empirical evidence, the Article concludes that if disabled women are ever to achieve an equivalent legal remedy for disability discrimination to disabled men, courts must no longer ignore the exacerbating effects of sex discrimination on disability discrimination. Indeed, the case of disabled women highlights the need for courts to reform judicially created proof structures in employment discrimination cases, which — although already the object of much scholarly scrutiny — are particularly unworkable for disabled women.

 

April 19, 2016 in Courts, Equal Employment, Healthcare | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, April 18, 2016

ICYMI Confirmation - The Anita Hill Story

This past weekend HBO aired "Confirmation" dramatizing Anita Hill's testimony in Justice Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearings.  For those of us who watched it, it seems like recent history, except that most of my students have no idea about any of it.

Here's a collection of news stories on the show and the confirmation itself:

Slate, Dahlia Lithwick & Gillian Thomas, National Group Therapy: How the Clarence Thomas Confirmation Hearings Changed How America Talks About Sexual Harassment

NYT, After OJ, Confirmation Revisits Another '90s Flashpoint: Anita Hill v. Clarence Thomas

Wash Post, "It Was Just Awful": The Clarence Thomas Hearings in the Words of Those Who were There

NPR, The Real Story Behind HBO's "Confirmation" From the NPR Reporter Who Broke the Story

 

April 18, 2016 in Equal Employment, Pop Culture, SCOTUS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

The Pay Gap as Women's Fault

Nicole Porter (Toledo), The Blame Game: How the Rhetoric of Choice Blames the Achievement Gap on Women8 FIU L. Rev. 447, 2013

Abstract:     

In 2013, fifty years after the Equal Pay Act guaranteed women equal pay for equal work, almost fifty years since Title VII made discrimination based on sex unlawful, thirty-five years since the Pregnancy Discrimination Act made it unlawful to discriminate against women because of pregnancy, and nineteen years after the Family and Medical Leave Act provided twelve weeks of unpaid leave for some caregiving reasons, there is still a significant achievement gap between men and women in the workplace. Women still make less money, and rise more slowly and not as high in workplace hierarchies. Why? The common narrative states that because these laws have given women access to formal equality for many years, the fact that women have not achieved equality in the workplace must be blamed on something else. Specifically, the “something else” relied upon by society, the media, employers, and courts, is that women’s own choices are to blame for the achievement gap. The blame game asserts that women’s relative lack of success in the workplace is caused by three interrelated choices: (1) women’s decision to not pursue high-pressure, high-status professions, or jobs that are seen as “men’s work”; (2) women’s unwillingness to negotiate on their own behalf; and (3) women’s decision to devote more time and effort to caregiving and homemaking tasks.

 

April 12, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Overuse of Summary Judgment in Equal Pay Act Cases

Deborah Thompson Eisenberg, Stopped at the Starting Gate: The Overuse of Summary Judgment in Equal Pay Act Cases,  57 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 815 (2013)

[T]his article provides an empirical analysis of summary judgment practice in Equal Pay Act (EPA or the “Act”) cases on the front lines of the trial courts. As every first-year law student should know, a court may grant summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 only if there is “no genuine dispute as to any material fact.”1 Courts have recognized that because of the “fact intensive nature” of the equal pay inquiry, “summary judgment will often be inappropriate” for equal pay claims.2 Although—in theory—most equal pay claims should survive summary judgment, an analysis of 500 recent EPA cases shows that— in practice—federal district courts summarily dismiss most equal pay claims.

April 12, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Shattering the Equal Pay Act's Glass Ceiling

Deborah Thompson Eisenberg (Maryland), Shattering the Equal Pay Act's Glass Ceiling, 63 SMU L. Rev. 17 (2010).

Abstract:     

This Article provides the first empirical and rhetorical analysis of all reported Equal Pay Act (EPA) federal appellate cases since the Act’s passage. This analysis shows that as women climb the occupational ladder, the manner in which many federal courts interpret the EPA imposes a wage glass ceiling, shutting out women in non-standardized jobs from its protection. This barrier is particularly troubling in light of data that shows that the gender wage gap increases for women as they achieve higher levels of professional status.

The Article begins by examining data regarding the greater pay gap for women in upper-level jobs. To evaluate the EPA’s effectiveness to address pay discrimination for these workers, the Article provides an overview of empirical trends in EPA appellate case law. The analysis shows that courts increasingly dismiss EPA cases at the summary judgment stage, despite the fact-intensive nature of the claims, and that women in non-standardized professional and managerial jobs are less likely to prevail. The Article examines the two competing notions of “equal work” present in EPA case law and proposes a more effective prima facie standard that better accommodates women in non-traditional jobs. The Article then identifies narratives underlying EPA cases that may allow pay discrimination to flourish for women in upper-level jobs, including the expansion of certain defenses into exceptions that swallow the equal payrule, the presumption of incompetence and lower value for women (even at the executive level), and secret pay processes that facilitate pay disparities. The Article analyzes these narratives in light of other psychological and business research and proposes new remedial models to shatter the EPA’s glass ceiling and ensure the promise of equal pay.

 

April 12, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Understanding Equal Pay Day and "79 cents"

Friday, March 11, 2016

Books: ACLU Lawyer Pens "Because of Sex" on Histories of Workplace Discrimination

Gillian Thomas, Because of Sex: One Law, Ten Cases, and Fifty Years That Changed American Women's Lives at Work

Because of Sex takes readers through ten landmark sex discrimination cases that helped dismantle a “Mad Men” world where women could only hope to play supporting roles, where bosses’ leers and propositions were as much a part of the air women breathed as cigarette smoke, and where pregnancy meant getting a pink slip. Readers will meet Ida Phillips, denied an assembly line job because she had a preschool-age child; Kim Rawlinson, who fought to become a prison guard—a “man’s job”; Mechelle Vinson, who endured sexual abuse by her boss before “sexual harassment” even had a name; Ann Hopkins, denied partnership at a Big Eight accounting firm because the men in charge thought she needed "a course at charm school”; and most recently, Peggy Young, forced off her UPS delivery route while pregnant because she asked for a temporary reprieve from heavy lifting.

 

Gillian is a Senior Staff Attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project.  She previously litigated sex discrimination cases at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Legal Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund). 

NYT, Book Review "Because of Sex," by Gillian Thomas

Thomas’s “Because of Sex” has many such stories — important reminders that laws have an impact that often exceeds lawmakers’ initial intentions. One strength of the book is her acute awareness of how people have responded to chance accidents, improbable circumstances and unimagined consequences. In fact, it was an 11th-hour amendment to Title VII, brought by Howard Smith, a segregationist congressman, that would ban discrimination in employment “because of sex.” As ­Thomas puts it, “Today most American working women would probably be surprised to know that they have an unrepentantly racist, male octogenarian to thank for outlawing sex bias on the job.”

 

Like Fred Strebeigh’s “Equal” (2009), “Because of Sex” is both meticulously researched and rewarding to read. The ­cases Thomas discusses put the muscle on the new law’s bones. Smith’s last-minute amendment created a blank slate: Congress had not given any clues to what sex equality might look like. Women’s refusal to accept the status quo would determine the law’s meaning.

 

Thomas is a gifted storyteller, and the changing circumstances of these women’s lives as their cases drag on, along with the unpredictability of the courts, give her plenty to work with. She provides lots of head-shaking moments. Surely, you say to yourself, that couldn’t have been legal — such as when a city utility required women to contribute 15 percent more to their pension fund because they lived longer than men. [See Department of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702 (1978)]

 

March 11, 2016 in Books, Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Dean Berkeley Law Sued for Sexual Harassment

Wash Post, Dean of Berkeley Law Sued for Sexual Harassment

The complaint was filed Tuesday against Berkeley Law School Dean Sujit Choudhry and the University of California Board of Regents.

 

Choudhry’s executive assistant, Tyann Sorrell, claims in the lawsuit that when Choudhry became dean in July 2014, he began kissing and touching her and giving her unwanted bear hugs, according to court documents.***

 

The complaint states that university officials reduced the dean’s salary by 10 percent for one year and required him to write a letter of apology to Sorrell.

 

Sorrell claims in the lawsuit that a university official later told her he had “seriously considered terminating the dean but that the reason he had decided not to was because it would ruin the dean’s career, that is, destroy his future chances for higher appointment,” according to Fox affiliate KTVU.

 

March 9, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Gender Equality and Women at Law in Cuba

Karin Paparelli, Gender Equality and Women at Law in Cuba

Gender equality and more specifically, the role of women in the legal profession in Cuba, presents a paradox of cultural restraint amid progressive policies. In a traditionally patriarchal society, Cuba has actually outpaced the United States and other nations when it comes to gender equality. Cuban women are found in  staggering numbers in the legal profession, politics and high-level ministerial positions. ***

 

Curiously, traditionally “male” professions in Cuba include  science, engineering, information technology, and mathematics and exclude medicine, education and law. Nearly 70 percent of health care workers including doctors, 80 percent of the education workforce, and surprisingly, 66 percent of all lawyers and judges in Cuba are women.

February 4, 2016 in Equal Employment, International, Women lawyers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, January 29, 2016

President Proposes Company Pay Disclosure Rules on 7th Anniversary of Lilly Ledbetter Act

 NPR, To Shine a Light on Salary Gaps, Obama Wants Companies to Disclose Pay Data

The Obama administration is proposing a new rule to address unequal pay practices by requiring companies with more than 100 employees to submit salary data by race, gender and ethnicity. 

 

The announcement comes seven years after President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — his first piece of legislation as president — which makes it easier for women to challenge discriminatory pay in court.

 

But a stubborn, substantial pay gap between men and women persists — and it affects black and Latina women the most, Obama said Friday as he introduced the proposal. The president said he'd continue to work to reduce the gap as long as he was in office."Social change never happens overnight," he said. "It is a slog and there are times when you just have to chip away and chip away ... it's reliant on all of us to keep pushing that boulder up the hill."

 

 "Social change never happens overnight," he said. "It is a slog and there are times when you just have to chip away and chip away ... it's reliant on all of us to keep pushing that boulder up the hill."

AAUW, Tell the Department of Labor to Finalize the New Pay Equity Proposed Rule

Seven years ago today, President Barack Obama signed into law his first piece of legislation as President, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. At today's event celebrating the anniversary, the president directed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in partnership with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), to publish a proposal to annually collect summary pay data by gender, race, and ethnicity from businesses with 100 or more employees. This step also expands on and replaces an earlier AAUW-supported plan DOL to collect similar information from federal contractors.


The new proposal will cover over 63 million employees, and the data collected would provide critical insights into the gender and racial pay gap. This step, stemming from a recommendation of the President's Equal Pay Task Force and a Presidential Memorandum issued on Equal Pay Day 2014, will help focus public enforcement of equal pay laws and provide better insight into discriminatory pay practices across industries and occupations.


DOL has identified the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) as the best collector of this summary data from employers. AAUW has long asserted that this kind of transparency is associated with a smaller gender pay gap, and that the implementation of this nationwide data collection is an important step in our efforts to ensure fair pay for all.

WaPo, Obama to Propose New Rule to Examine Gender Pay Inequality

White House Announces Actions to Advance Equal Pay

 

January 29, 2016 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Accommodating Motherhood in the Workplace to Include Women's Unique Skills

Elizabeth Rose Schlitz (St. Thomas), Motherhood: Benefit or Burden to Business,  International Study Seminar on “Women and Work”, Pontifical Council for the Laity, Rome, Italy (2015)

Abstract:     

This essay is a contribution to an International Study Seminar on the topic of “Women and Work”, convened by the Pontifical Council for the Laity in Rome, Italy, on December 4-5, 2015, to be published with the complete proceedings of the conference.

In recent decades, the Catholic Church has come to share the widespread social consensus about the urgent need for the insights of the feminine genius in all sectors of society – in the home as well as the halls of government, schools and universities, and businesses. However, an argument for women in the workplace does not, in itself, furnish a compelling business case for mothers in the workplace. Is there something unique about the gifts, talents, and perspectives of women who are mothers, or something unique about what women who are mothers add to the dynamic of men and women working together?

This essay argues that persuasive arguments for accommodating mothers in workplace are crucial for two reasons: First, to ensure that employers who want to achieve gender balance do not follow the lead of companies such as Facebook and Apple, offering incentives for women to remain childless during their most productive years as ‘ideal workers’ rather than accommodating parenting. Second, to ensure the continued presence in workplaces and national and international governing bodies of people with personal stakes in advocating for policies to enable parents to balance their work and their caregiving responsibilities, and in reminding their nations and the world of the reality that the overwhelming proportion of the world’s poverty population is composed of women and children – across the globe, in countries of all stages of development.

The essay offers four arguments for the value of mother in the workplace: (1) businesses want women workers, and most women workers want to be mothers; (2) businesses benefit long term from the caregiving work of mothers, and should thus shoulder some of its cost; (3) accommodating motherhood is not, in fact, as much of a burden on businesses as is commonly thought; and (4) mothers offer some unique and valuable skills to the workplace.

 

January 27, 2016 in Equal Employment, Religion | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Diversity Policies Rarely Work and May Even Decrease Diversity

Tessa L. Dover, Brenda Major, Cheryl R. Kaiser, Diversity Policies Rarely Make Companies Fairer, and They Feel Threatening to White Men, Harv. Bus. Rev.

U.S. companies spend millions annually on diversity programs and policies. Mission statements and recruitment materials touting companies’ commitment to diversity are ubiquitous. And many managers are tasked with the complex goal of “managing diversity” – which can mean anything from ensuring equal employment opportunity compliance, to instituting cultural sensitivity training programs, to focusing on the recruitment and retention of minorities and women.

 

Are all of these efforts working? In terms of increasing demographic diversity, the answer appears to be not really. The most commonly used diversity programs do little to increase representation of minorities and women. A longitudinal study of over 700 U.S. companies found that implementing diversity training programs has little positive effect and may even decrease representation of black women.

 

Most people assume that diversity policies make companies fairer for women andminorities, though the data suggest otherwise. Even when there is clear evidence of discrimination at a company, the presence of a diversity policy leads people todiscount claims of unfair treatment. In previous research, we’ve found that this is especially true for members of dominant groups and those who tend to believe that the system is generally fair.

 

All this has a real effect in court. In a 2011 Supreme Court class action case, Walmart successfully used the mere presence of its anti-discrimination policy to defend itself against allegations of gender discrimination. And Walmart isn’t alone: the “diversity defense” often succeeds, making organizations less accountable for discriminatory practices.

January 20, 2016 in Equal Employment, Race | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

World Bank Report on Gender Equality Calls for Legal Change

The Atlantic, Gender Equity Requires Changes in Law, Not Just Culture

Women’s labor-force participation doesn’t alone signify economic freedom, but it is one of the mechanisms by which women can build wealth and gain financial independence. A new report from the World Bank takes a look at the legal status of women around the world and finds that while there has been progress in many countries when it comes to making financial freedom more accessible, laws still exist that can make women especially economically vulnerable.

 

Legal barriers that restrict women’s opportunities to work are the most obvious culprits of gender inequality across the globe. In Russia, for instance, researchers found that women are legally barred from working 456 different (and pretty specific) jobs including woodworking and driving trucks that carry agricultural goods. Similar laws are also prevalent in the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, and North Africa. And while wealthier, more developed nations are less likely to have explicit legal prohibitions on women working, they do exist. Eight of 32 OECD high-income countries, including Israel, France, the Republic of Korea, and Japan, have laws that bar women from certain jobs. French law prohibits women moving loads that weigh more than 45 kilograms via a wheelbarrow. And in Argentina, women are barred from loading and unloading ships, the paper finds.

December 30, 2015 in Equal Employment, International | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, December 18, 2015

Law Student Studies Gender Inequity in His Research

Law Student Studies Gender Inequity in His Research

UW Law student Harlan Mechling couldn’t go to his little sister’s graduation from Willamette University, but his father did call to tell him she was graduating as a member of Phi Beta Kappa, a nation-wide honor society, with 42 other women and 16 men. Those numbers stood out to Mechling, instigating his research on gender inequity.

 

 “The more I thought about it, the more I realized that’s not surprising because it’s consistent with my experience,” Mechling said. “Throughout my life, girls have always been at the top of the class.”
 

Mechling’s research revealed that women account for more than 60 percent of students graduating with honors, 9 percent higher than their percent of the student population. Despite these feats, most women will likely be getting paid only 78 percent of what their male colleagues will earn.

 

Kellye Testy, dean of the UW School of Law, believes her students face persistent gender discrimination once they’re out in the work world.

 

“One of the areas I’ve always been interested in is legal education,” Testy said. “We’ve been admitting women in law school a roughly equal number as men for a few decades now. 

 

But if you look at the world and the number of CEOs, governors, law school deans, etc., the percentage of women is much lower than it should be.”

 

She clarified that it is not just the UW law school that is graduating equal numbers of men and women.

 

Mechling’s research used statistics from Phi Beta Kappa. He gathered stats from emails sent out to those who qualified and the number of people in the society, from 27 private and public universities. Mechling wanted to measure academics because it was one of the only measurements that was consistent across universities in different states.

 

He began his research thinking maybe the high percentage of women in honors was just a Northwest thing, but was surprised to find consistency among schools.

 

The research paper Mechling created, titled “Follow California’s lead — help women recover damages for workplace sex/gender discrimination,” also states that even with the same amount of work experience, women teachers are paid 11 percent less than male teachers within a year of graduating college. In business and management jobs, women make 86 percent of what men are paid. In sales it is even less, with women earning 77 percent of what men get paid, according to Mechling. 

 

Testy believes it is because of implicit bias. She said gender equity is certainly moving in the right direction, but there’s a long history in the United States of gender discrimination.

 

Mechling said one way to address these issues is for states to have better non-discrimination laws.

 

“The best solution is a federal law amending the Equal Pay Act of 1973,” Mechling said. “There have been attempts to do that, but House Republicans keep shooting it down. I think the state is the only way it’s going to work because Congress has shown repeatedly that it’s not going to happen on the federal level.”

 

States tend to interpret the Equal Pay Act very broadly, according to Mechling. Usually there are four defenses for unequal pay and gender inequity, one of which allows employers to justify pay disparity as long as it’s any factor other than sex.

 

Cited in his research, the American Bar Foundation found only 6 percent of employment discrimination filings between 1987 and 2003 went to trial. Only one-third of those cases were successful. Even for employment discrimination cases, 40 percent are dismissed or lost at summary judgment.

 

Martina Kartman, a UW law student who was an intake investigator at the Seattle Office for Civil Rights, did the initial interviews at the office to determine if a discrimination case would be taken or not. 

 

“I think one of the things that was most difficult about discrimination laws and enforcing them is that they are from the ‘60s,” Kartman said. “Our laws haven’t always kept up with change.”

 

December 18, 2015 in Equal Employment, Law schools, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

Lochner's Gendered Legacy

Muller-oregon

(Muller v. Oregon, 1908)

At the NE Ohio Faculty Colloquium last week, I presented on the topic derived from my forthcoming book chapter on the long history of the ERA. 

For this presentation, I focused on the early history of ERA, introduced by Alice Paul in the midst of the Supreme Court's detour into Lochnerism.  A close review of the Lochner cases on maximum hours law, shows how gendered these cases were.  The Court struck down laws like that in Lochner limiting men's work, while easily upholding the same limitation for women.  The advent of the Brandeis Brief (or more appropriately the Kelley Brief since it was mostly written by Florence Kelley) in Muller v. Oregon (1908) added sociological facts of women's weakness, primary material function, and need for protection research designed to justify the rationality of the state legislature's determination that women needed protection.

My takeaways on looking at Lochner through the gendered lends were:  

1.  It explains some of the flip-flops and seeming inconsistencies of Lochner to understand legalistic exceptions were made for women.

 

 2.  It shows how grounded Lochner was in masculinity: real mean don’t need “protection.”  Men were tough, strong, and could withstand or counter the abuse of workplace.  (Except maybe in the case of coal mining, see Holden v. Hardy, 1898)..

 

3.   And perhaps most importantly, it reveals the historical depth of what Joan Williams calls the “ideal worker.”  The ideal worker since industrialization was male, able to work unlimited hours at a moment's notice, needed the job as a family breadwinner, and never needs any accommodations like pregnancy leave, nursing breaks, or family leave.  Women are defined as "other" than the ideal, or even regular work.  Women themselves defined female workers this way, attuned to the realities of women's working class experience.  

 

 

November 3, 2015 in Constitutional, Courts, Equal Employment, Gender, Legal History | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, October 16, 2015

"Marine Corps Study Finds No Detriment to Morale in Mixed-Gender Combat Units"

From the NYT: 

The Marine Corps has long held concerns that integrating women into combat units could erode morale in all-male platoons and lead to increased sexual tension that would undermine fighting capability. But a Marine Corps study made public by a women’s advocacy group this week found that after months of testing mixed-gender combat units, troops reported morale equal to that of all-male groups and higher than noncombat integrated groups

In addition, the study found sexual assault levels no higher than in the Marines as a whole.

October 16, 2015 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, October 15, 2015

OH Introduces Equal Pay Bill

Cleveland.com Democratic Ohio Lawmakers Introduce "Equal Pay" Bill

Two Northeast Ohio representatives introduced legislation aimed at closing the pay gap between Ohio men and women by requiring state employers to review employee salaries and encouraging all employers to adopt policies supporting equal pay among men and women working comparable jobs.

 

Democratic Reps. Stephanie Howse of Cleveland and Kathleen Clyde of Kent said Wednesday the bill is necessary because Ohio women make 78 cents for every dollar a man earns. Nationally, black women earn 63 cents and Hispanic and Latina women earn 54 cents for every $1 earned by white men.

 

"Part of our bill seeks to root out the systemic undervaluing and undperpaying of women's work," Clyde said at a Wednesday news conference.

House Bill 330 has little chance of clearing the Republican-controlled Statehouse. The bill has 24 co-sponsors, all Democrats.

 

The Ohio Equal Pay Act would require state and local governments to evaluate employee pay for comparable work across job categories and eliminate pay associated with "women's work." Positions that have similar duties, responsibilities, and general requirements would be considered in the same "class." A class would be considered women-dominated if more than 70 percent of those employees are female and men-dominated if more than 80 percent of those employees are male.

October 15, 2015 in Equal Employment, Legislation | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, October 8, 2015

Title VII is not a Tort

Sandra Sperino (Cincinnati), Title VII is Not a Tort

In several posts, I will be blogging about how federal courts are pushing federal discrimination law out of a public law model and into a more private law frame....

 

In upcoming posts, I will explain why Title VII is not a tort in any way that conveys specific, textual meaning.  The claim that Title VII is a tort ignores the history of the statute and its text.  It also unnecessarily muddies an already confusing jurisprudence and leads to odd results in what would otherwise be fairly easy cases.

What Does it Mean for Something to be a Tort?

When I say Title VII is not a tort, what I mean is that it does not fit precisely into the mold of any traditional tort.  Calling Title VII a tort in some general sense does not help to answer the vast majority of questions that arise in discrimination cases.  The tort label is dangerous because it allows courts to claim that tort law demands particular results in discrimination cases.  This is simply not true.

 

October 8, 2015 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Second Circuit Revives Gender Bias Case Against Sterling Jewelers

NLJ, Gender Bias Case Revived Against Nation's Biggest Jeweler

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has reinstated an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sex discrimination case against the nation’s largest jewelry retailer, ruling for the first time that courts should not scrutinize the sufficiency of the agency’s pre-suit investigation.

 

The case, brought in 2008 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleged that Akron, Ohio-based Sterling Jewelers Inc., which operates several jewelry store chains including Kay Jewelers and Jared -The Galleria of Jewelry, had a nationwide practice of discriminating against its female sales employees in both pay and promotion.

 

U.S. District Judge Richard Arcara of the Western District of New York had granted summary judgment to Sterling in 2014 based on the report of a magistrate judge who concluded that the EEOC’s pre-suit investigation hadn’t been nationwide.

 

Wednesday’s ruling by the Second Circuit expanded on the U.S. Supreme Court’s April 29 decision inMach Mining v. EEOC, which held that judges could review on a limited basis the agency’s efforts at conciliating claims prior to filing suit.

 

In a case of first impression, the Second Circuit found that the EEOC, in demonstrating it conducted a pre-suit investigation, did not need to “describe in detail every step it took or the evidence it uncovered.”

 

Writing for the appellate panel, Judge John Walker said, “Under Title VII, courts may review whether the EEOC conducted an investigation, but not the sufficiency of an investigation.” He added, “Extensive judicial review of this sort would expend scarce resources and would delay and divert EEOC enforcement actions from furthering the purpose behind Title VII – eliminating discrimination in the workplace.”

 

EEOC Associate General Counsel Jennifer Goldstein praised the ruling. “The court of appeals recognized that Title VII gives the EEOC ‘expansive discretion’ in investigating claims of discrimination,” she wrote in an email. “Such discretion is critical for EEOC as it makes decisions about how to expend scarce resources.”

 

September 15, 2015 in Equal Employment | Permalink | Comments (0)