Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Shakman was a reform Democrat. He and the other plaintiffs objected to the support the incumbent Democratic candidates received from public employees which were mandatory for those desiring to keep their jobs. Shakman felt that it was a violation of employee rights and free elections, and an abuse of public funds. [1] [2] [3]
Employment discrimination against persons with criminal records in the United States has been illegal since enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [citation needed] Employers retain the right to lawfully consider an applicant's or employee's criminal conviction(s) for employment purposes e.g., hiring, retention, promotion, benefits, and delegated duties.
Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, 497 U.S. 62 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that the First Amendment forbids a government entity from basing its decision to promote, transfer, recall, or hire low-level public employees based upon their party affiliation. [1]
A Texas woman is prison-bound after she’s accused of embezzling $3 million from her employers over 10 years, forcing layoffs and bonus cuts. Employee stole $3 million, forcing layoffs and bonus ...
In the United States, smoker protection laws are state statutes that prevent employers from discriminating against employees for using tobacco products. Currently twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia have such laws. Although laws vary from state to state, employers are generally prohibited from either refusing to hire or firing an ...
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, No. 16-1466, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), abbreviated Janus v.AFSCME, is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on US labor law, concerning the power of labor unions to collect fees from non-union members.
Baird v. State Bar of Arizona: 401 U.S. 1 (1971) states cannot ban people from legal practice due to Communist party membership In re Stolar: 401 U.S. 23 (1971) A state cannot require bar applicants to list every organization he or she belonged to since starting law school—decided same day as Baird v. State Bar of Arizona: Younger v. Harris ...
Here’s what the Texas penal code on execution of judgment states: TITLE 1, Art. 43.03 A court may not order a defendant confined under Subsection (a) of this article unless the court at a ...