Search results

The purpose of this article is to document the extent of girls' under‐representation in nontraditional high school career and technical education courses, examine the role of sex discrimination in these disparities, and identify legal remedies for addressing the problem.

This article uses high school CTE enrollment data from 12 states to document female students' under‐representation in nontraditional courses and uses wage data to show the negative implications for girls' future earnings. Drawing on the experiences of female students, this study explains how sex discrimination contributes to their low rates of participation in nontraditional training. The study then discusses how laws and regulations at the federal and state levels may provide means to address such discrimination.

Finds high levels of sex segregation in CTE course enrollment, with female students making up on average 15 percent of students in nontraditional courses and 87 percent in traditionally female fields. Substantial evidence of sex discrimination in CTE makes a strong case for its role in contributing to girls' low enrollment in nontraditional courses. Varied state laws can be utilized to address this underlying cause.

While much research has looked at girls in math and science, less attention has been paid to their participation in nontraditional CTE. This paper offers quantitative evidence of girls' under‐representation in such courses and qualitative evidence of the role sex discrimination plays. Offers a unique solution by showing how state laws can be used to address such discrimination and increase girls' participation in nontraditional training.

This substantial article begins with an examination of two important grounds of discrimination: sex discrimination governed by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (and the related Equal Pay Act 1970) and racial discrimination under the Race Relations Act 1976. Discussion is confined to the right not to be discriminated against and covers the detailed provisions of these acts in this respect, judicial precedents and important cases heard not only in the British courts but in the European Court of Justice. The third section of the article is about discrimination in connection with trade union membership and activities governed by the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an in‐depth understanding of the lived experience of sex discrimination from the perspective of women in the Wal‐Mart case and unravels the daily mechanisms through which sex discrimination takes place.

One hundred and ten in‐depth statements from women who are current and former employees of Wal‐Mart, describing in detail their work experience, were employed as the main source of data. We have carried out a detailed content analysis of these in‐depth interviews identifying the mechanisms of sex discrimination.

Findings identify the specific mechanisms through which sex discrimination takes place. In the context of the current sex discrimination case, the paper provides a rich body of evidence in unraveling the everyday mechanisms of sex discrimination. It observes that instead of individual events, at important thresholds, sex discrimination is a result of small, everyday acts and gendered assumptions, which often appear supportive and harmless.

The richness of the data provides the unique, empirical opportunity to observe the process in detail, but this paper focuses exclusively on the process, and the end‐results remain outside the scope of the paper.

The paper provides a very useful source of information and practical advice for women in the labor force in identifying the supportive, nice and harmless mechanisms and everyday experience of sex discrimination.

This paper exclusively focuses on the process and identifies the mechanisms of sex discrimination using a rich source of qualitative data. It offers empirical evidence in identifying the daily assumptions and everyday mechanisms of sex discrimination. Sex discrimination in the everyday lives are carried out in disguise of harmless, nice and often supportive behavior; therefore this paper offers explanations as to why many women stay in these exploitative jobs as long as they do.

This study aims to examine whether the demographics of the US federal judiciary and the type of employment discrimination charge influence federal employment discrimination case outcomes.

The outcomes of 401 randomly selected employment discrimination cases were examined by utilizing chi square analysis to test the interaction effects of race and gender along with four different charges of employment discrimination.

The findings suggest that the outcomes of employment discrimination cases are a function of the interaction of the judges' gender and race along with the type of discrimination charge (e.g. gender, race, age, or disability discrimination) involved in the case.

More research studies with larger cell sample sizes for certain discrimination claims should be conducted to ascertain the validity of the current results.

Potential litigants in employment discrimination cases (both plaintiffs and defendants) may find these results relevant in determining their chances for success in the courtroom.

These findings could help judges become more aware of potential biases and help guard against being influenced by them. These findings may also have implications for the selection and appointment of judges and suggest that judicial bodies that are more diverse may render more unbiased rulings.

Previous research regarding the influence of the sex and race of the judge on court case outcomes has yielded contradictory and confusing findings. However, by controlling for the possible influence of the type of charge involved in the cases, the findings of the current study suggest that judges' rulings are a function of the interaction of the judges' demographic characteristics with the type of discrimination charge.

The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the related Equal Pay Act 1970, and the Race Relations Act 1976 have not been consolidated by the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978. Each of the Acts treats sex and race discrimination in a general and broad sense. Both make similar provisions in connection with various aspects of discrimination in employment. Since one act is inspired by the other, the judicial precedent in sex discrimination cases will normally be followed in racial discrimination cases and vice versa. Both Acts are outlined and the grounds that constitute discrimination discussed as well as permissible discrimination. Enforcement of the Acts and liability is detailed. Discrimination in connection with trade union membership and activities is also examined. The right not to have action short of dismissal taken against the employee and remedies for action short of dismissal are discussed.

Several studies find that there is little sex gap in wages at labor market entry, and that the sex gap in wages emerges (and grows) with time in the labor market. This evidence is consistent with (i) there is little or no sex discrimination in wages at labor market entry, and (ii) the emergence of the sex gap in wages with time in the labor market reflects differences between women and men in human capital investment (and other decisions), with women investing less early in their careers. Indeed, some economists explicitly interpret the evidence this way. We show that this interpretation ignores two fundamental implications of the human capital model, and that differences in investment can complicate the interpretation of both the starting sex gap in wages (or absence of a gap), and the differences in “returns” to experience. We then estimate stylized structural models of human capital investment and wage growth to identify the effects of discrimination (or other sources of a starting pay gap) and differences in human capital investment.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

Presents the results of a study of 84 first year undergraduates in Hong Kong which looked at discrimination due to gender. Considers the female students’ experience in relation to home, school and work showing that the study suggests they face blatant and subtle sexist attitudes in all areas. Looks at the male perception of discrimination against women which implies that some recognize and sympathise with the issue, whilst others hint that there is a backlash against the feminist movement. Discusses the implication of the findings.

Employees have a statutory right to request a change to their working hours or conditions to enable them to care for children (so long as they meet certain criteria). The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 enables workers to claim that a requirement, such as to work on a full‐time basis, is discriminatory. There are no eligibility requirements for this argument although there is an evidentiary burden. The penalties for breach of the Sex Discrimination Act are greater than the new right. To what extent do the new Flexible Working Regulations provide a right to a change in working patterns, and what role remains for the Sex Discrimination Act?

This study aims to examine whether the diversity of the US federal judiciary has an influence on case outcomes in employment discrimination cases. Specifically, this paper investigates if the gender and race of both judges and plaintiffs result in significantly different employment case outcomes in the US district court system.

A random sample of 657 federal employment discrimination cases from the last decade were analyzed utilizing chi square analysis testing combinatory and interaction effects of race and gender.

The results intimate that the demographic characteristics of judges and plaintiffs do have an effect on case outcomes. Specifically that different combinatory types and interactions of judges and plaintiffs are associated with different case outcomes.

These results could be useful to potential litigants in employment discrimination cases to assist employees and employers alike in the determination of their chances for success in the courtroom. Judges may also benefit from more information on possible biases and take steps to guard against being influenced by them.

Such research focuses more attention on the fundamental principle of the American judicial system of fair and equal treatment for all. Furthermore, some findings have implications for the demographic composition of the US Supreme Court and other judiciary bodies where decisions are arrived at by a group.

Little to no research has examined the possible differences in case outcomes associated with different combinatory types of both judges and plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases.