Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Sex discrimination in employment.
Статті в журналах з теми "Sex discrimination in employment"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Sex discrimination in employment".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Sur, Gina, and Brian H. Kleiner. "Sex Discrimination in Employment: Everyone's Problem." Equal Opportunities International 14, no. 6/7 (June 1995): 54–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb010650.
Повний текст джерела
2
Furxhi, Gentisa, Sonela Stillo, and Enslemvera Zake (Furxhi. "Job Discrimination and Ethics in the Workplace." European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 1, no. 2 (April 30, 2016): 138. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v1i2.p138-145.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Every society wants to have an ethical community. Although, that every citizen wants to be treated as equal, studies show that discrimination and gender inequality in employment relationships are present in every society, at any time. Discrimination is: treating a person or particular group of people differently, especially in a worse way from the way in which you treat other people, because of their skin color, sex, sexuality, etc . Job discrimination is when institutional decisions, policies, or procedures are at least partially based on illegitimate forms of discrimination that benefit or harm certain groups of people. Developed societies have a lower rate of job discrimination than developing societies have. Although, it is unclear why in these societies with economic civilization and culture development, job discrimination still exists, when the right of employment is sanctioned and guaranteed by Labor Code and by specific laws. The most common forms of job discriminations are discriminations based on gender, race, ethnic origin, religion, age. New forms are based on disability, sexual orientation, genetics and lifestyle. Not all discrimination is intentional or conscious. Sometimes people favor some groups of people over others as a matter of personal preference, or unconsciously accept stereotypes. Whatever, job discrimination is intentional or it is conscious, it is always immoral. Job discriminations violates utilitarian, rights and justice principles of ethics. Our study is focused to see how much job discriminations is widespread in Albanian society. We will analyze forms of discriminations to have a clear view which are the most common job discriminations types in Albania. Also, we will figure out if employees who have been discriminated in the workplace, have reported this unethical behavior to their supervisor or at the relevant state bodies. At the end, we will see if there has been any punishment to those who use discrimination to the employees.
3
McGinley, Ann. "Erasing Boundaries: Masculinities, Sexual Minorities, and Employment Discrimination." University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, no. 43.3 (2010): 713. http://dx.doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.43.3.erasing.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This Article analyzes the application of employment discrimination law to sexual minorities-lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender and intersex individuals. It evaluates Title VII and state anti-discrimination laws' treatment of these individuals, and is the first article to use masculinities research, theoretical and empirical, to explain employment discrimination against sexual minorities. While the Article concludes that new legislation would further the interests of sexual minorities, it posits that it is neither necessary nor sufficient to solving the employment discrimination problems of sexual minorities. A major problem lies in the courts' binary view of sex and gender, a view that identifies men and women as polar opposites, and that sees gender as naturally flowing from biological sex. Without courts' understanding that our current binary concept of gender may be socially constructed and artificially rigid rather than a natural result of biology, even new legislation may fail to protect the workers it seeks to protect. The Article demonstrates that research on masculinities can help courts better understand sexual minorities and the motivations of those who discriminate against them in the workplace. It concludes that even in the absence of new legislation, a proper interpretation of Title VII's sex discrimination provision would protect sexual minorities from discrimination and would provide reasonable accommodation to allow sexual minorities to live and work with dignity and security. With an understanding of sexual minorities and the reasons why discrimination occurs, Title VII's prohibition of discrimination "because of sex" should be sufficient to grant sexual minorities workplace rights.
4
Sansone, Dario. "Pink work: Same-sex marriage, employment and discrimination." Journal of Public Economics 180 (December 2019): 104086. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.104086.
Повний текст джерела
5
SKIDMORE, P. "COMMENTARY: Sex, Gender and Comparators in Employment Discrimination." Industrial Law Journal 26, no. 1 (March 1, 1997): 51–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ilj/26.1.51.
Повний текст джерела
6
Skaggs, Sheryl, and Jennifer Bridges. "Race and Sex Discrimination in the Employment Process." Sociology Compass 7, no. 5 (April 17, 2013): 404–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12037.
Повний текст джерела
7
Flynn, Leo. "Book Review: Justifications for Sex Discrimination in Employment." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 1, no. 3 (March 1996): 299–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135822919600100309.
Повний текст джерела
8
Herbert, Ari. "Portlandia, Ridesharing, and Sex Discrimination." Michigan Law Review Online, no. 115 (2016): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.36644/mlr.online.115.portlandia.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This Essay discusses and assesses the legal hurdles that See Jane Go and SafeHer may face. Part I of this Essay explains how the plain text of Title VII and the pertinent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guideline can fairly be read either to allow or condemn See Jane Go and SafeHer’s hiring practices. Part II then highlights precedent that supports See Jane Go’s and SafeHer’s discriminatory driver–passenger practices. Part III concludes by arguing that the legal system ought to make room for apps like See Jane Go and SafeHer in the current framework.
9
Herbert, Ari. "Portlandia, Ridesharing, and Sex Discrimination." Michigan Law Review Online, no. 115 (2016): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.36644/mlr.online.115.portlandia.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This Essay discusses and assesses the legal hurdles that See Jane Go and SafeHer may face. Part I of this Essay explains how the plain text of Title VII and the pertinent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guideline can fairly be read either to allow or condemn See Jane Go and SafeHer’s hiring practices. Part II then highlights precedent that supports See Jane Go’s and SafeHer’s discriminatory driver–passenger practices. Part III concludes by arguing that the legal system ought to make room for apps like See Jane Go and SafeHer in the current framework.
10
Schmidt, Marlene, and Olga Rymkevich. "Editorial." International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 21, Issue 4 (December 1, 2005): 535–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2005025.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Anti-discrimination legislation and case law dealing with employment discrimination are among the most topical labour law issues in Europe. As a result, The International Journal for Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations has received so many manuscripts on questions related to employment discrimination that we have decided to dedicate a complete issue to this matter. One reason why employment discrimination is such a hot topic is the fact that in recent years extensive EC legislation proscribing employment discrimination has been passed: Directive 2000/43/EC prohibiting discrimination on grounds of race and ethnic origin, Directive 2000/78/EC banning discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, and finally Directive 2002/73/EC amending Directive 76/207/EEC barring sex discrimination in employment and occupation. And a correction in the paper by Kees J. Vos (Vol 21.3)
11
Roscigno, Vincent J., Lisette M. Garcia, and Donna Bobbitt-Zeher. "Social Closure and Processes of Race/Sex Employment Discrimination." ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 609, no. 1 (January 2007): 16–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716206294898.
Повний текст джерела
12
Cranmer, Frank, and Scot Peterson. "Employment, Sex Discrimination and The Churches: The Percy Case." Ecclesiastical Law Journal 8, no. 39 (July 2006): 392–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956618x00006694.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this paper, the authors present different views of the legal implications of Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission, in which the House of Lords reversed the Court of Session and held that a former minister could sue the Church under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and, contrary to previous views, probably had an enforceable contract for services. Cranmer describes the basis for the decision and suggests that it represents a realistic view of the employment status of clergy. Peterson is less optimistic about the decisions legal and practical effects and argues that it undermines the constitutional status of the Church of Scotland as well as overall prospects for religious freedom in Scotland.
13
Carty, Hazel. "The Sex Discrimination Act 1986: Equality or Employment Deregulation?" Journal of Social Welfare Law 9, no. 3 (May 1987): 175–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649068708412171.
Повний текст джерела
14
Honorée, André L., and Rusty Juban. "Is there transgender bias in the courtroom?" Employee Relations: The International Journal 42, no. 6 (July 4, 2020): 1531–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/er-11-2019-0444.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
PurposeThis study examines whether various judicial demographic and political characteristics have an influence on case outcomes in transgender employment discrimination cases. Specifically, it assesses whether the race, sex or political party of federal judges result in significantly different employment case outcomes for transgender employees in the US district courts.Design/methodology/approachUtilizing a legal database of all federal employment discrimination cases over the past five decades, the study ultimately identified 97 cases with transgender plaintiffs. Chi-square and frequency analyses were employed to test the hypotheses regarding the effect of race, sex and political party of federal judges on transgender employment case outcomes.FindingsThe results intimate that both the political party and sex of the judge have an effect on case outcomes. Specifically, the transgender plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases have a greater chance for success when such cases are presided before Democratic and female judges.Practical implicationsThe study's findings of significant differences in case outcomes suggest that characteristics of judges should be taken into account by potential plaintiffs and defendants, as they consider if/how to proceed with their cases.Social implicationsSuch research focuses more attention on the fair and equal treatment principle of the American judicial system due to the significant differences found in case outcomes as a result of judges' characteristics.Originality/valueNo research till date has examined the outcomes of transgender employment discrimination cases in the US despite national surveys indicating the pervasiveness and severity of such discrimination.
15
Terpstra, David E., and André L. Honorée. "Differences in the nature of employment discrimination litigation between private sector organizations and public sector organizations." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 16, no. 4 (July 24, 2016): 200–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1358229116645677.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study reports on the results of a content analysis of federal court cases examining employment discrimination litigation in private, federal, and state/local sector organizations. One objective was to determine whether there are differences in the types of employment discrimination claims (e.g. race, sex, age, and disability) across the different sectors. A second objective was to determine whether there are differences in the outcomes (whether the case outcome or ruling was for the plaintiff or the defendant) of the different types of employment discrimination cases across the different sectors. The results of this study indicate that there are substantial differences in both the types of discrimination charges and the outcomes of those discrimination charges across the different sectors. The implications of the most significant findings are discussed, and recommendations are offered to organizations interested in reducing the occurrence of employment discrimination and the costs associated with employment discrimination litigation.
16
Roehling, Mark V., Patricia V. Roehling, and Maria Fernanda Wagstaff. "Sex Differences in Perceived Weight-Based Employment Discrimination When Weight Discrimination is Illegal." Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 25, no. 3 (April 17, 2013): 159–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10672-013-9217-y.
Повний текст джерела
17
Meenan, Helen. "Age Discrimination: Law-Making Possibilities Explored." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 4, no. 3 (September 2000): 247–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135822910000400303.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Is there a sound model for the United Kingdom (UK) to adopt should it decide to legislate against age discrimination in employment? In this article the writer attempts to answer this question first, by outlining existing UK sex and race discrimination laws and then progressing to an examination of long-standing American legislation and caselaw in this area. Finally, it explores the Irish Employment Equality Act, 1998, a composite and comprehensive act which prohibits discrimination in employment based on ‘age’ and eight other grounds. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these laws are examined in turn and measured against each other. The final analysis would suggest that each of these models can usefully inform any future law-making process to a greater or lesser degree and that good practice and legislation can co-exist in harmony. Moreover, the present lack of legislation in the UK against age discrimination in any area but especially employment, is remarkable when compared with British laws on sex and race discrimination and is ultimately unwise in the face of the real need for remedies and, the present and growing expansion in numbers of that portion of the population and the working population which British and European society call ‘old.’
18
Sargeant, Malcolm. "For Diversity, Against Discrimination: the Contradictory Approach to Age Discrimination in Employment." International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 21, Issue 4 (December 1, 2005): 629–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2005029.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract: This article argues that there is a contradiction contained within the Framework Directive on Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation and the UK Government?s proposals for implementing it. There is a distinction between the business justification for encouraging diversity in the workforce and the human rights justification for ending age discrimination. The first approach weakens the latter by legitimising continued discrimination on the basis of age. This is especially important because there is a close relationship between age discrimination and discrimination on the grounds of sex, race and disability.
19
Ross, June. "Sex Discrimination: Employment Law and Practices by Arjun P. Aggarwal." Alberta Law Review 33, no. 3 (June 1, 1995): 706. http://dx.doi.org/10.29173/alr1136.
Повний текст джерела
20
Davison, Heather K., and Michael J. Burke. "Sex Discrimination in Simulated Employment Contexts: A Meta-analytic Investigation." Journal of Vocational Behavior 56, no. 2 (April 2000): 225–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1711.
Повний текст джерела
21
Widiss, Deborah A. "Menstruation Discrimination and the Problem of Shadow Precedents." Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 41, no. 1 (November 8, 2021): 235–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.v41i1.8841.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The burgeoning menstrual justice movement highlights that women, girls, transgender men and boys, and non-binary persons may face discrimination or harassment due to their menstruation in workplaces, schools, prisons, and many other aspects of life. In recent years, a few courts have suggested such discrimination may violate Title VII, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment. Their analysis focuses on the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), an amendment to Title VII passed in response to a Supreme Court case holding that pregnancy discrimination was not sex discrimination. The PDA overrode the decision by explicitly defining sex as including “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.”
The menstruation discrimination cases thus implicate more general questions of how statutory overrides should be interpreted, a subject I’ve explored extensively in prior work. My research suggests that this nascent litigation campaign may face two distinct challenges. The first is that courts will simply deny the claims, reasoning that menstruation is not directly addressed by the text of the PDA and therefore should not be recognized as sex discrimination. The second—which is more subtle, and also perhaps more likely—is that courts could find such discrimination to be actionable, but do so relying solely on the PDA’s explicit reference to “medical conditions” related to pregnancy. While that would be helpful for addressing discrimination in workplaces, it could open the door to arguments that menstruation is outside the ambit of sex discrimination laws that were not amended in a manner analogous to how Title VII was amended.
To avoid these potential risks, theorists and advocates should seek to establish that menstruation discrimination is discrimination on the basis of “sex” itself, in that it is a condition linked to female reproductive organs and associated with stereotypes about women’s inferiority. That reasoning, which suggests that the PDA is properly interpreted as signaling Congress’s disapproval with the Supreme Court’s unduly narrow understanding of what constitutes sex discrimination in the earlier pregnancy case, should apply not only to Title VII, but also to the interpretation of statutory and regulatory prohibitions on sex discrimination in non-employment contexts.
22
Akhtar, Zia. "Discrimination in employment, religious symbols and the “actual knowledge” of the employer." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 19, no. 2 (April 15, 2019): 125–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1358229119837470.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Title VII of the US Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. section 2000e, et seq., as amended (“Title VII”), prohibits employers with at least 15 employees (including private sector, state, and local government employers), as well as employment agencies, unions, and federal government agencies, from discriminating in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It also prohibits retaliation against persons who complain of discrimination or participate in an Equal Employment Opportunity investigation. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that prohibit workplace discrimination and it has intervened by the federal body to prevent religious discrimination by corporations which seem to be breaching the law by discriminating against their employees. In EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch 575 U.S. ____ (2015), the US Supreme Court held that a religious practice of an employee should be accommodated if it does not cause “undue hardship.” The Court then formulated the principle that applicant does not have to show that the employer had “actual knowledge” of the applicant’s need for accommodation. Instead, the Court held that “an applicant need only show that his need for an accommodation was a motivating factor in the employer’s decision.” This has given the scope to a Chapter VII definition that stops short of strict liability but binds the employer to facilitate the employee where religious symbols are concerned. This article reviews the recent case law on discrimination in the work place and the disparate treatment test interpreted by the Supreme Court in the framework of employment law for religious employees and argues that the employer’s actual knowledge requirement depends upon the circumstances of each case.
23
Palk, Laura, and Shelly Grunsted. "Born Free: Toward an Expansive Definition of Sex." Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, no. 25.1 (2018): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.25.1.born.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The State of New York recently issued its first physician-certified “intersex” birth certificate, correcting a 55-year-old’s original birth certificate. This is a positive step towards eliminating the traditional binary approach to a person’s birth sex, but it creates potential uncertainties in the employment discrimination context. Over the past several years, the definition of what constitutes “discrimination on the basis of sex” has both expanded (with the legalization of same-sex marriage) and narrowed (restricting the use of gender specific bathrooms). Until recently it appeared that a broader definition of the term “sex” would become the judicial—and possibly legislative—norm in a variety of contexts. However, several obstacles have emerged to jeopardize true equality for the LGBTQIA community, including (1) inconsistent judicial opinions regarding the meaning of “sex,” (2) the increased ability of employers to utilize religion or “any other factor” as a defense to discrimination claims, (3) regressive executive policies regarding the definition of “sex,” and (4) uncertainty about the extent to which transgender individuals may remain in the military. Although each of these issues warrants thorough analysis and has sparked scholarly debate, in this Article we focus on another critical inequality: wage disparity. Specifically, we are concerned with the problem posed for DSD and transgender individuals, given the Equal Pay Act’s requirement that plaintiffs demonstrate they are paid differently from the “opposite sex” for a wage disparity claim. The Equal Pay Act (EPA) is outdated and discriminatory in its application, and it unnecessarily subjects an entire segment of the workforce—LGBTQIA individuals—to continued discrimination. The EPA requires that plaintiffs prove their cases through reference to an opposite sex comparator, but then defers to the employer’s subjective definition of who “the opposite sex” is. This makes LGBTQIA plaintiffs’ cases essentially unwinnable. Uncertainty for the LGBTQIA community is further compounded by the expansion of the employer’s right, under both the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, to invoke religion, conscience, or “any other factor” as an affirmative defense to discrimination claims. In this Article, we discuss the interplay between a plaintiff’s sex-specific protections (against sex-based employment discrimination under Title VII and against wage disparity under the Equal Pay Act) and an employer’s affirmative defenses (under Title VII, the EPA, and current interpretations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act). Our discussion concludes with recommendations for an expansive definition of the word “sex” and the adoption of the recently proposed Equality Act to help alleviate all forms of sex-based discrimination in the employment context.
24
Gafford Muhammad, Crystal. "An Oasis within a Desert Palace : Proving Sex Discrimination in the New Millennium." NWSA Journal 19, no. 3 (September 2007): 67–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/ff.2007.a224756.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the case of Desert Palace v. Costa (2003), the Supreme Court's liberalization of evidentiary standards in proving discrimination helps women building cases of discrimination along the legal frame of disparate treatment theory. Desert Palace v. Costa clarifies and effectively expands the type of evidence that can be used to prove sex discrimination in cases where legitimate and illegitimate reasons are used to curtail employment opportunities. Now direct and circumstantial evidence can be used to build a case of sex discrimination in these mixed-motives cases. Given the nuances of faculty evaluation processes and the subjectivities therein, this legal development is particularly beneficial to women in academia. Nevertheless, while Desert Palace v. Costa is a progressive step forward, the law of sex discrimination remains limited in its ability to provide remedy in cases where similar treatment results in outcomes that vary on the basis of sex.
25
Sargeant, Malcolm. "Justifying Age Discrimination." Business Law Review 33, Issue 8/9 (August 1, 2012): 204–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/bula2012049.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Age discrimination is the only protected characteristic contained in the Equality Act 2010 where it is possible to justify both direct and indirect discrimination. In relation to all the other protected characteristics, such as in race and sex discrimination, there is no possibility of justifying direct discrimination. The test, deriving from Art. 6 of the Framework Directive on Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation (Directive 2000/78/EC), provides that the employer will need to show that they have a legitimate aim and that the potentially discriminatory action taken is a proportionate means (appropriate and necessary) of achieving that aim.
26
England, Paula, Gunther Schmid, Renate Weitzel, and Mary Huff Stevenson. "Sex Discrimination and Equal Opportunity: The Labor Market and Employment Policy." Contemporary Sociology 16, no. 2 (March 1987): 154. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2070665.
Повний текст джерела
27
Nikolaou, Dimitrios. "Same‐sex marriage laws, LGBT hate crimes, and employment discrimination charges." Southern Economic Journal 88, no. 3 (November 13, 2021): 869–905. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/soej.12548.
Повний текст джерела
28
Clarke, Linda. "Harassment, Sexual Harassment, and the Employment Equality (Sex Discrimination) Regulations 2005." Industrial Law Journal 35, no. 2 (June 1, 2006): 161–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwl012.
Повний текст джерела
29
Frager, Ruth A., and Carmela Patrias. "Human Rights Activists and the Question of Sex Discrimination in Postwar Ontario." Canadian Historical Review 102, s3 (September 1, 2021): s802—s824. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/chr-102-s3-012.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article examines the varied understandings of human rights in Ontario in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War. The article compares the social origins and implementation of Ontario’s Fair Employment Practices Act – which combatted racist and religious discrimination – with Ontario’s Female Employees Fair Remuneration Act – which mandated equal pay for women who did the same work as men. Although a few feminists called for the Fair Employment Practices Act to prohibit sex discrimination as well, their pleas fell mainly on deaf ears in this period. Men and women who fought against racist injustice were frequently unaware of gender injustice, for they, like so many others, subscribed to the deeply embedded ideology of the family wage. Conversely, some of the most outspoken advocates of women’s rights were unconscious of – or chose to ignore – racism. At the same time, some of the most committed advocates of equal pay for equal work actually reinforced certain conventional assumptions about men’s gender privilege at work and at home. Moreover, while the enforcement of both acts was constrained by the conciliatory framework embedded within them, the government officials who were charged with applying both acts interpreted the equal pay act quite narrowly and were significantly more diligent in tackling racist and religious employment discrimination.
30
Vickers, Lucy. "IS ALL HARASSMENT EQUAL? THE CASE OF RELIGIOUS HARASSMENT." Cambridge Law Journal 65, no. 3 (November 23, 2006): 579–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197306007239.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
IN 2000 the Employment Directive was enacted by the European Community, creating a framework for combating discrimination in employment on grounds not previously covered by Community law, namely religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation. To a large extent the definitions of discrimination are uniform in relation to the different grounds of discrimination. In accordance with the Directive, new Regulations have been introduced in the UK prohibiting discrimination on grounds of religion or belief (the Religion and Belief Regulations) and sexual orientation, and amendments have been made to some aspects of the law governing discrimination on grounds of race, sex and disability. Age discrimination is subject to regulations which came into force in October 2006. One common aspect of these new laws and amendments is that the concept of harassment is specifically defined, instead of being viewed as a form as discrimination.
31
Jain, Harish C. "Race and Sex Discrimination in Employment in Canada. Theories, Evidence and Policies." Relations industrielles 37, no. 2 (April 12, 2005): 344–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/029258ar.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
After having examined three theoritical approaches, the author presents public policy relating to race and sex discrimination in employment and analyzes 74 cases decided by the boards of enquiry and courts.
32
Prenzler, Tim. "Equal Employment Opportunity and Policewomen in Australia*." Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 28, no. 3 (December 1995): 258–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000486589502800302.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Limited statistics make for difficulties in producing a clear picture of the impact of equal employment opportunity policies in Australian police services. Available figures indicate that pre-entry physical ability tests are a significant source of attrition of aspiring policewomen. Women also appear to be disproportionately more likely to separate as a result of maternal obligations, and report higher incidents of sexual harassment and sex discrimination in promotion and deployment. Considering the historical marginalisation of women in policing, Australian police services have made large steps forward in reducing discrimination in a relatively short period of time. Improvements can nonetheless be made in making policing a more viable career option for women, and recruiting appears to be the main area where proactive measures are needed.
33
Alteri, Ashley M. "Side-Effects of Representation: Measuring the Impact of Representative Hiring on Employment Discrimination Complaints." Administration & Society 52, no. 10 (May 8, 2020): 1562–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095399720915293.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Since 1978, the government has been implementing programs to combat the underrepresentation of minorities in federal employment. However, representative bureaucracy literature has done little to examine the impact these initiatives are having on the workplace. This article examines the relationship between changes in representation and discrimination complaints. Increases in the ratio of minority and female employees predict an increase in the rates of race and sex-discrimination complaints, respectively. Increases in the ratio of Black/African American and Asian employees predict an increase in race-discrimination complaints. However, the ratio of employees ages 40 or above did not predict changes in age discrimination.
34
Sunstein, Cass R. "Why Markets Don't Stop Discrimination." Social Philosophy and Policy 8, no. 2 (1991): 22–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500001114.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Markets, it is sometimes said, are hard on discrimination. An employer who finds himself refusing to hire qualified blacks and women will, in the long run, lose out to those who are willing to draw from a broader labor pool. Employer discrimination amounts to a self-destructive “taste” – self-destructive because employers who indulge that taste add to the costs of doing business. Added costs can only hurt. To put it simply, bigots are weak competitors. The market will drive them out.On this account, the persistence of employment discrimination on the basis of race and sex presents something of a puzzle. And if markets are an ally of equality and a foe of employment discrimination, perhaps discrimination persists because of something other than markets. Perhaps labor unions are to blame; perhaps the real culprit is the extensive federal regulation of the employment market, including minimum-wage and maximum-hour laws and unemployment compensation. If competitive markets drive out discrimination, the problem for current federal policy lies not in the absence of aggressive anti-discrimination law, but instead in the absence of truly competitive markets.If this account is correct, the prescription for the future of anti-discrimination law is to seek ways to free up employers from the wide range of governmental disabilities – including, in fact, anti-discrimination law itself. The argument seems to be bolstered by the fact that some groups subject to past and present prejudice – most notably, Jews and Asian-Americans – have made substantial progress in employment at least in part because of the operation of competitive markets.
35
Kristl Davison, H., and Mark N. Bing. "Obesity: Disability or Public Health Crisis?" Industrial and Organizational Psychology 6, no. 1 (March 2013): 96–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iops.12016.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In their article, Ruggs, Law, Cox, Roehling, Wiener, Hebl, and Barron (2013) address a number of underresearched groups that are subject to discrimination. We applaud the authors for calling attention to the neglected groups in the study of discrimination. However, it is likely that researchers have neglected some of these groups for practical reasons as the discrimination against these groups is either less intense or less widespread. For example, religious discrimination has accounted for between 2% and 4% of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charges, whereas race and sex discrimination together have accounted for approximately 65% of discrimination charges (EEOC, 2012a).
36
Kovačević-Perić, Slobodanka. "Adjustment of gender identity and consequences on employment rights." Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad 54, no. 4 (2020): 1363–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/zrpfns54-28049.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The gender identity of every person represents an integral part of their personality and belong to one of the basic aspects of self-definition, dignity and freedom. A certain number of people do not identify themselves with the sex allotted to them at birth, a problem arising regarding their inner comprehension of gender (self-defining), which does not correlate to the sex. Those people are called trans people. In this paper, the author examines the position of trans people i.e. individuals of different gender identity through the prism of the realization and protection in the field of labour rights and the rights arising from employment. Trans people belong to one of the most vulnerable (most discriminated) groups within society - discrimination is most evident in case of seeking a work placement and during employment, while the key performers are the state and its institutions. It could be said that conditioning and interdependence between the legal procedure of adjustment of gender identity and medical interventions, leave the legal and life status of a transgender person in "vacuum", which leads to the situation of gender identity being the grounds for further transphobia and discrimination of transgender people in all the aspects of human rights realization. However, in the procedure of further adjustment of gender identity, a transgender person can be registered in the birth certificate register, they can change their personal documents only based on the certificate of a health institution that they have been through a psychological check-up and a year-long hormone therapy prescribed by an endocrinologist. In practice, such regulations put "on hold" the personal status of a transgender person, which leads to the discrimination of transgender people based on gender identity, especially in the phase of transition, when the changes are visible but non-compliant with the sex verified in personal documents. Therefore, it is crucial that, instead of partial amendments to certain laws, an umbrella law (lex specialis) be adopted - Law on Gender identity
37
Schiek, Dagmar. "Age discrimination before the ECJ conceptual and theoretical issues." Common Market Law Review 48, Issue 3 (June 1, 2011): 777–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/cola2011032.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Although only addressed by EU law from 2000, age discrimination has been the theme of quite a few cases before the Court of Justice, with a high proportion decided by the Grand Chamber recently. This is due to the conceptual and theoretical challenges that a prohibition to use age as differentiating factor poses. After all, age has been an important stratifier used to synchronize life courses through welfare State regimes in Europe. Partly due to these traditions, there are stereotypes associated with old age, and young age, that in turn lead to disadvantage in employment. For the same reason, age discrimination frequently intersects with discrimination on other grounds, such as sex, race or disability. EU legislation on age discrimination has sought to accommodate the traditional role of age in employment policy by allowing wider justifications than for other forms of discrimination. This leads to contradictions within the larger field of discrimination law, which may even threaten to dilute its efficiency. This article analyses how recent case law of the Court of Justice, and in particular its Grand Chamber, deals with the theoretical challenges posed by these conflicting demands on age discrimination and on discrimination law at large.
38
Ruszkowski, Kelsey R. "Defining sex-based discrimination among strife between the Justice Department and the EEOC." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 19, no. 3-4 (September 2019): 200–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1358229120904621.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the last few decades, US Supreme Court rulings have made strides for the advancement of the LGBT community. However, this community has yet to enjoy equality in the workplace due to its exclusion from Title VII protection. This article details the recent conflict between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Department of Justice in interpreting Title VII and how this conflict may make it difficult for the Supreme Court to reach a broad ruling concerning sex discrimination under Title VII. The EEOC relies on Supreme Court precedent concerning sex stereotyping to extend Title VII protection to sexual orientation while the Justice Department employs a textualist argument to support a narrow interpretation of sex. However, changing societal norms and advancing neuroscientific research support the conclusion that sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression is included under “sex” even when using textualism to interpret Title VII. Given that the Supreme Court is unlikely to defer to the EEOC’s interpretation, these arguments stemming from the social sciences may provide the support the Court needs to justify a decision to end employment discrimination against the LGBT community and gender nonconformists in a way that is consistent with the positions of both the EEOC and the Justice Department.
39
Hewitt, Anne, Rosemary Owens, Andrew Stewart, and Joanna Howe. "Are work experience participants protected against sex discrimination or sexual harassment?" Alternative Law Journal 46, no. 2 (March 22, 2021): 115–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1037969x211002853.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
More and more young Australians are undertaking periods of work experience as a part of their study or independently to facilitate their transition into employment. They are often subject to a significant power disparity compared to others in the workplace, and need the placement to finish a course, and/or to get practical experience, connections and industry references. This makes them vulnerable, including to sexual harassment and sex discrimination. However, whether prohibitions of such conduct apply to them is a complex question, which this article explores.
40
Leigh, Ian. "Hatred, Sexual Orientation, Free Speech and Religious Liberty." Ecclesiastical Law Journal 10, no. 3 (August 12, 2008): 337–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956618x08001440.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In recent years, the clash between supporters of religious liberty and sexual orientation equality legislation has led to repeated battles both in Parliament and the courts. First came the clashes over the scope of exemptions in employment discrimination legislation for religious groups. The UK Regulations dealing with employment discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation give a limited exception for ‘employment for purposes of an organised religion’, which allows an employer to apply a requirement related to sexual orientation to comply with the doctrines of the religion, or to avoid conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion's followers. A legal challenge brought to the scope of this exception was unsuccessful but, despite that, the exemption has not averted damaging findings of discrimination against the Church of England. The Bishop of Hereford was held to have discriminated unlawfully in blocking the appointment of a practising homosexual to a youth-officer post within the Church of England. The partial success of religious groups in achieving exemption was followed by defeat in the equivalent regulations dealing with discrimination in goods and services, made under the Equality Act 2006, despite the claims of Catholic adoption agencies that they would rather close than place children with same-sex couples.
41
Sandberg, Russell. "To Equality and Beyond: Religious Discrimination and the Equality Act 2006." Ecclesiastical Law Journal 8, no. 39 (July 2006): 470–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956618x00006761.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Recent years have witnessed a piecemeal development of discrimination law that affects religious organisations: the collection includes statutes such as the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Race Relations Act 1976, statutory instruments such as the Employment Equality Regulations 2003 and 2005, and international human rights instruments such as Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The newest addition to the collection is the Equality Act 2006 (c 3), which received Royal Assent on 16 February 2006.
42
Aksoy, Billur, Christopher S. Carpenter, and Dario Sansone. "Knowledge about Federal Employment Nondiscrimination Protections on the Basis of Sexual Orientation." AEA Papers and Proceedings 113 (May 1, 2023): 541–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20231054.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Using a US nationally representative online sample, we measure the level of knowledge on employment nondiscrimination laws. Although Americans are well informed about sex, race, and disability being protected characteristics, only about 71 percent think that sexual orientation is a protected characteristic. Sexual minorities are as uninformed as heterosexual individuals that sexual orientation is legally protected from employment discrimination. Furthermore, sexual minorities living in states that did not previously have statewide employment nondiscrimination protections prior to the 2020 Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County are less likely to think that sexual orientation is a protected characteristic.
43
Kline, Patrick, and Christopher Walters. "Reasonable Doubt: Experimental Detection of Job‐Level Employment Discrimination." Econometrica 89, no. 2 (2021): 765–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.3982/ecta17489.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This paper develops methods for detecting discrimination by individual employers using correspondence experiments that send fictitious resumes to real job openings. We establish identification of higher moments of the distribution of job‐level callback rates as a function of the number of resumes sent to each job and propose shape‐constrained estimators of these moments. Applying our methods to three experimental data sets, we find striking job‐level heterogeneity in the extent to which callback probabilities differ by race or sex. Estimates of higher moments reveal that while most jobs barely discriminate, a few discriminate heavily. These moment estimates are then used to bound the share of jobs that discriminate and the posterior probability that each individual job is engaged in discrimination. In a recent experiment manipulating racially distinctive names, we find that at least 85% of jobs that contact both of two white applications and neither of two black applications are engaged in discrimination. To assess the potential value of our methods for regulators, we consider the accuracy of decision rules for investigating suspicious callback behavior in various experimental designs under a simple two‐type model that rationalizes the experimental data. Though we estimate that only 17% of employers discriminate on the basis of race, we find that an experiment sending 10 applications to each job would enable detection of 7–10% of discriminatory jobs while yielding Type I error rates below 0.2%. A minimax decision rule acknowledging partial identification of the distribution of callback rates yields only slightly fewer investigations than a Bayes decision rule based on the two‐type model. These findings suggest illegal labor market discrimination can be reliably monitored with relatively small modifications to existing correspondence designs.
44
Chapman, Bruce J., and Charles Mulvey. "An Analysis of the Origins of Sex Differences in Australian Wages." Journal of Industrial Relations 28, no. 4 (December 1986): 504–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002218568602800402.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Different levels of measured skills, geographic location and demographicfactors (such as marital status and country of birth) explain almost none of the hourly wage differences of Australian women and men in full-time employment. The major contribution to wage differences is apparently in the different returns paid by employers to men and women for observable characteristics. Usually this is considered as evidence for the existence of direct wage discrimination by employers but—at least for the data of this study—some questions remain as to the extent of this influence. Measurement issues related to both schooling and general labour market experience tend to exaggerate the role of direct employer discrimination, but even extreme assumptions as to the extent of mismeasurement of these variables do not eliminate such discrimination (although it is reduced from 13 to 3.5 per cent). Some part of the overall difference is likely to be a consequertce of (unmeasured) occupation factors and, of much greater contplexity, the possible influence of role-stereotyping and its interaction with family arrangements.
45
Kuchko, A. V. "Peculiarities of Legal Regulation of Non-Discrimination on Gender Basis while Being Employed." Law and Safety 81, no. 2 (July 2, 2021): 160–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.32631/pb.2021.2.22.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Constitution of Ukraine enshrines and guarantees the right to labor as an opportunity to earn a living by work that a person freely chooses or agrees to. However, the current conditions indicate that the consolidation and guarantee of everyone’s right to labor is not an unconditional evidence of its inviolability, the absence of unjustified restrictions and obstacles to its realization. One of such obstacles to the realization of this right is gender discrimination, which violates the balance of male and female labor at the labor market and creates an imbalance in the harmonious development of labor and closely related relations. In this regard, the author has emphasized the importance of the existence of a wide range of effective legal principles in the national labor legislation for non-discrimination while employment, in particular on the grounds of sex, as well as an effective mechanism for their realization.
It has been clarified that the legal regulation of non-discrimination on the grounds of sex while employment is the legal regulation of labor and closely related relations through legal means in order to achieve gender parity, prevention of any manifestations of gender discrimination in the realization of the right to labor by each person and citizen.
It has been established that the current state of the development of legislative provisions of Ukraine in the field of employment implies the existence of a certain range of legal principles regulating the prevention of discrimination on the grounds of sex while being employed. The emphasis has been placed on the analysis of certain legal principles of non-discrimination, the effect of which extends to the stage of job search and acquaintance with current vacancies at the labor market. Their legal content has been analyzed and suggestions for their semantic improvement have been provided.
It has been determined that an unjustified refusal to be hired should be considered a refusal that is devoid of any motivation or when an employer refuses a candidate for reasons other than his professional and business qualities, or does not take into account a number of special requirements provided by the current legislation.
The author has emphasized on the need to create legal conditions for the harmonious combination of the interests of an employee and an employer, which can assist in preventing discrimination and allowштп each party to labor and closely related relations to achieve the desired result in realizing their labor rights and interests.
46
Hervey, T. K. "Justification for Indirect Sex Discrimination in Employment: European Community and United Kingdom Law Compared." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 40, no. 4 (October 1991): 807–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclqaj/40.4.807.
Повний текст джерела
47
Khamzina, Zhanna, Yermek Buribayev, Yerkin Yermukanov, and Aizhan Alshurazova. "Is it possible to achieve gender equality in Kazakhstan: Focus on employment and social protection." International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 20, no. 1 (March 2020): 5–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1358229120927904.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
International ratings confirm that Kazakhstan is a leader in Central Asia in addressing the causes of gender inequality; however, there are still significant gender differences in key areas. In particular, gender discrimination in the labor market is complex: when hiring or dismissing, while restricting access to certain professions and positions, in matters of promotion and career growth, when remuneration is paid for performing the same work, not related to differences in labor efficiency. Discrimination is especially sensitive in relation to pregnant women and women with young children. Discrimination continues with access to social measures for avoiding poverty and in the pension system. Further progress requires more strategically significant and focused actions to identify and bridge the remaining factors of systemic discrimination and gender gaps. In the article, we show the insufficient attention of the legal science of Kazakhstan to the problems of regulation of equality. We present the author’s methodology for analyzing labor and social legislation from the perspective of regulating gender equality, consisting of several assessments: Kazakhstan’s fulfillment of international obligations; implementation of the principle of nondiscrimination in labor and social legislation; administrative and judicial mechanisms to protect against discrimination based on sex; and opportunities for implementing best foreign and international practices for the regulation of equality.
48
Koshan, Jennifer. "Intersections and Roads Untravelled: Sex and Family Status in Fraser v Canada." Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 30, no. 2 (May 12, 2021): 29–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/cf29420.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
It has been a long road to the judicial recognition of women’s inequality under the Cana‑ dian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.1 The Supreme Court of Canada ruling in Fraser v Can‑ ada is significant for being the first decision where a majority of the Court found adverse effects discrimination based on sex under section 15,2 and it was only two years prior that a claim of sex discrimination in favour of women was finally successful at the Court,3 almost 30 years after their first section 15 decision in Andrews v Law Society of British Columbia. 4
1 Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11 [Charter], s 15. 2 Fraser v Canada (Attorney General), 2020 SCC 28 [Fraser]. 3 Quebec (Attorney General) v Alliance du personnel professionnel et technique de la santé et des services sociaux, 2018 SCC 17 [Alliance] (majority found sex discrimination under s 15 and rejected the government’s justification argument under s 1 in the pay equity context). See also Centrale des syndicats du Québec v Quebec (Attorney General), 2018 SCC 18 [Centrale] (majority found violation of s 15 but accepted the government’s s 1 argument, also in the pay equity context). For comments on these decisions see Fay Faraday, “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? Substantive Equality, Systemic Discrimination and Pay Equity at the Supreme Court of Canada” (2020) 94 SCLR (2d) 301; Jonnette Watson Hamilton & Jennifer Koshan, “Equality Rights and Pay Equity: Déjà Vu in the Supreme Court of Canada” (2019) 15 JL & Equality 1. See also British Columbia Teachers’ Federation v British Columbia Public School Employers’ Association, 2014 SCC 70 (a one-paragraph decision restoring an arbitrator’s award allowing a s 15 employment benefits claim by women); Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v NAPE, 2004 SCC 66 (finding a violation of s 15 but accepting the government’s s 1 argument, again in the pay equity context).4 [1989] 1 SCR 143, 56 DLR (4th) 1.
49
Seiden, Richard H., and Molly Gleiser. "Sex Differences in Suicide among Chemists." OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying 21, no. 3 (November 1990): 177–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/buab-6twh-mrqm-bk74.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Suicides among twenty-eight female chemists and among sixty-three male chemists were investigated for age, marital status, educational qualifications, type of employment, minority status, chemical specialties, and method of suicide. Although work played a significant part in suicides by both males and females, there were marked sex differences. Isolation, the leading work-related factor, occurred more frequently and with greater intensity among women. Similarly, while the majority of women suffered some form of sex discrimination, none of the men did. The leading nonwork-related causes were interpersonal problems and mental illness, the latter also more common among women. Low self-esteem coupled with high achievement orientation was a dangerous combination of personality characteristics found twice as frequently in suicides by female as by male chemists. In conclusion, suicide prevention guidelines are proposed.
50
Barnard, Catherine, Claire Kilpatrick, and Simon Deakin. "Equality, Non-Discrimination and the Labour Market in the UK." International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 18, Issue 2 (June 1, 2002): 129–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/5086491.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
English law lacks a general principle of equality of the kind found in constitutional texts in some other European countries. Legislation embodies a principle of non-discrimination in employment on grounds of sex, race and disability. This body of law stresses formal rather than substantive equality, and defines discrimination in terms of the asymmetrical treatment of individuals rather than by reference to the structural sources of group disadvantage. These conceptual weaknesses are part of the explanation for the relatively limited impact of the legislation on the UK labour market, which continues to be characterized by occupational segregation and persistent pay inequality.