When.com Web Search

  1. Ads

    related to: title 7 lawsuit against employer

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Bostock v. Clayton County - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bostock_v._Clayton_County

    Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court civil rights decision in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of sexuality or gender identity.

  3. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.G._&_G.R._Harris_Funeral...

    Whether Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on (1) their status as transgender or (2) sex stereotyping under Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. Holding; An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ...

  4. Griggs v. Duke Power Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.

    Although private employers with 15 or more employees are subject to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, it was held in Washington v. Davis (1976) that the disparate impact doctrine does not apply to the equal protection requirement of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Thus, lawsuits against public employers may be barred by sovereign immunity.

  5. Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_v._Martin...

    Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp., 400 U.S. 542 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court landmark case in which the Court held that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an employer may not, in the absence of business necessity, refuse to hire women with pre-school-age children while hiring men with such children.

  6. Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledbetter_v._Goodyear_Tire...

    Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. [1] The result was that employers could not be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims were based on decisions made by the employer 180 days or more before the claim.

  7. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_v._Forklift_Systems...

    Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that it is "an unlawful employment practice for an employer . . . to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." [1]

  8. Ricci v. DeStefano - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano

    Among other things, the suit alleged that, by discarding the test results, the City and the named officials discriminated against the plaintiffs based on their race, in violation of both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 253, as amended, 42 U. S. C. §2000e et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ...

  9. Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_v._Southwest...

    Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Co., 517 F. Supp. 292 (N.D. Tex. 1981), is a US employment discrimination law case concerning bona fide occupational qualifications. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. [1]