When.com Web Search

  1. Ad

    related to: title 7 lawsuit against employer for stress and pain research articles

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. Civil Rights Act of 1991 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1991

    It added provisions to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protections expanding the rights of women to sue and collect compensatory and punitive damages for sexual discrimination or harassment. U.S. President George H. W. Bush had used his veto against the more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1990. He feared racial quotas would be ...

  5. Employment discrimination law in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination...

    The United States Constitution also prohibits discrimination by federal and state governments against their public employees. Discrimination in the private sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, but has become subject to a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal ...

  6. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Northern_&_Santa...

    Case history; Prior: White v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad Co., 364 F.3d 789 (6th Cir. 2004). Holding; The anti-retaliation provision (42 U. S. C. §2000e–3(a)) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not confine the actions and harms it forbids to those that are related to employment or occur at the workplace.

  7. 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 ...

  8. Vance v. Ball State University - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vance_v._Ball_State_University

    Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), is a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding who is a "supervisor" for the purposes of harassment lawsuits. The Supreme Court upheld the Seventh Circuit's decision in a 5–4 opinion written by Samuel Alito, rejecting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretation of who counts as a supervisor. [1]

  9. 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.