held that that Title VII prohibits gender specific fetal protection policies

Held that that title vii prohibits gender specific

  • Test Prep
  • kellmargs2
  • 43
  • 100% (2) 2 out of 2 people found this document helpful

This preview shows page 26 - 28 out of 43 pages.

held that that Title VII prohibits gender specific fetal protection policies . Hence based on that statute, the Court decided against Johnson Controls by concluding that the company’s fetal protection policy contravened Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the PDA ; and the company's gender-specific rule was biased and inequitable because it permitted fertile men, but not fertile women, to decide whether to work in jobs subjected to lead exposure while manufacturing batteries Olson v. Northern FS inc . {age discrimination based termination}
Image of page 26
ADEA wrongful termination action Olson terminated at age 59 and replaced by 22 year old with no sales experience Is Olson's firing and replacement by younger worker a violation of ADEA? P must present direct or circumstantial evidence that employer took an adverse job action against him because of his age (direct method) or by constructing a convincing mosaic or circumstantial evidence that allows a jury to infer intentional discrimination by a jury maker Olson was only required to to show that he was performing his job to the employer's legitimate expectations and that employer hired someone else who was substantially younger or other such evidence that indicates that it is more likely than not that age was reason for discharge P's evidence that he was meeting legitimate expectations and was replaced by someone younger and supervisor's "age-ist" remark Case goes to jury, Olson wins Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital {at will termination, public policy exception} Catherine Wagenseller was a staff nurse and received good performance reviews and promotions Went camping with staff and supervisor and refused to take part in a ritual and game Is an employer's right to terminate on at-will employee limited by an rules which, if breached, give rise to a cause of action for wrongful termination The "public policy" exception to employment at will, which permits recovery upon a finding that conduct undermined a public policy An employer may fire for good cause or for no cause, he may not fire for bad cause P refused to participate in activities which arguable would have violated indecent exposure statute Wagenseller wins, against public policy to make her commit a crime in order to keep her job Jacobson v. United States {entrapment vs. predisposal to crime} Brief Fact Summary: The defendant, Keith Jacobson (the “defendant”), ordered child pornography through a government sting operation. The defendant argued the defense of entrapment, claiming his order came only after twenty six months of mailings from the government. Synopsis of Rule of Law: The burden of proof is on the state to prove that a defendant is predisposed to violate the law before the government intervenes.
Image of page 27
Image of page 28

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 43 pages?

  • Spring '08
  • Baker

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture