Considers the practical realities of applying the law on a day-to-day basis and answers all the common questions, covering: what harrassment is and how to stop it, when and how discrimination occurs, how to conduct training, how to handle employee complaints, and much more. Original.

Gerry Handley faced years of blatant race-based harassment before he filed a complaint against his employer: racist jokes, signs reading “KKK” in his work area, and even questions from coworkers as to whether he had sex with his daughter as slaves supposedly did. He had an unusually strong case, with copious documentation and coworkers’ support, and he settled for $50,000, even winning back his job. But victory came at a high cost. Legal fees cut into Mr. Handley’s winnings, and tensions surrounding the lawsuit poisoned the workplace. A year later, he lost his job due to downsizing by his company. Mr. Handley exemplifies the burden plaintiffs bear in contemporary civil rights litigation. In the decades since the civil rights movement, we’ve made progress, but not nearly as much as it might seem. On the surface, America’s commitment to equal opportunity in the workplace has never been clearer. Virtually every company has antidiscrimination policies in place, and there are laws designed to protect these rights across a range of marginalized groups. But, as Ellen Berrey, Robert L. Nelson, and Laura Beth Nielsen compellingly show, this progressive vision of the law falls far short in practice. When aggrieved individuals turn to the law, the adversarial character of litigation imposes considerable personal and financial costs that make plaintiffs feel like they’ve lost regardless of the outcome of the case. Employer defendants also are dissatisfied with the system, often feeling “held up” by what they see as frivolous cases. And even when the case is resolved in the plaintiff’s favor, the conditions that gave rise to the lawsuit rarely change. In fact, the contemporary approach to workplace discrimination law perversely comes to reinforce the very hierarchies that antidiscrimination laws were created to redress. Based on rich interviews with plaintiffs, attorneys, and representatives of defendants and an original national dataset on case outcomes, Rights on Trial reveals the fundamental flaws of workplace discrimination law and offers practical recommendations for how we might better respond to persistent patterns of discrimination.

Throughout this impressive and controversial account of the fight against job discrimination in the United States, Paul Burstein poses searching questions. Why did Congress adopt EEO legislation in the sixties and seventies? Has that legislation made a difference to the people it was intended to help? And what can the struggle for equal employment opportunity tell us about democracy in the United States? "This is an important, well-researched book. . . . Burstein has had the courage to break through narrow specializations within sociology . . . and even to address the types of acceptable questions usually associated with three different disciplines (political science, sociology, and economics). . . . This book should be read by all professionals interested in political sociology and social movements."—Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Social Forces "Discrimination, Jobs and Politics [is] satisfying because it tells a more complete story . . . than does most sociological research. . . . I find myself returning to it when I'm studying the U.S. women's movement and recommending it to students struggling to do coherent research."—Rachel Rosenfeld, Contemporary Sociology

"The U.S. civil court system consists of three levels: 1) District Courts ("Trial Courts"), 2) Circuit Courts of Appeal ("appellate courts") and 3) the Supreme Court (see Figure 1.1). The United States has a total of 94 districts, representing distinct geographic regions (see Table 1.1). The number of districts varies by state. For instance, some states have only one district (e.g., Arizona, Colorado, Delaware), while others have multiple districts, such as California, Florida, and Michigan (e.g., Southern District of California, Central District of California)"--

The Oxford Handbook of Workplace Discrimination synthesizes decades of evidence and inspires a brand new era of science-practice collaboration in understanding and reducing discrimination at work.

Like all the other volumes in the Stories collection, this book provides students with a three dimensional picture of the most important cases that are addressed in nearly every employment discrimination casebook and course. These stories give the students and faculty members a deeper understanding of the historical and cultural background of the cases and an insight into their long term impact on the development of employment discrimination law.

For US baby boomers morphing into older employees, an attorney draws on many years of experience in employment discrimination for a timely review of age-related stereotypes, discriminatory workplace practices, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, recommendations for ADEA changes, and recourse options. Annotation copyrighted by Book News Inc., Portland, OR

The Fourth Edition of Employment Discrimination: Examples & Explanations Joel Friedman utilizes the time-tested Examples and Explanations format to expand on employment law and include new content based on recent changes to employment discrimination law. New to the Fourth Edition: Title VII: Application to Claims of Sexual Orientation, Transgender Status and Gender Identity-Based Discrimination Title VII Procedure: Relationship between Scope of EEOC Charge and Civil Action Title VII Procedure: Availability of Class-Wide Arbitration Section 1981 Mixed Motive Claims Unavailable Age Discrimination in Employment Act: No minimum employee size requirement for public sector workers Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Federal government workers can establish liability with a mixed motive claim but will need to establish but for causation to receive affirmative relief Professors and students will benefit from: Includes references to all important developments through Supreme Court’s 2019-2020 term

It is no secret that since the 1980s, American workers have lost power vis-à-vis employers through the well-chronicled steep decline in private sector unionization. American workers have also lost power in other ways. Those alleging employment discrimination have fared increasingly poorly in the courts. In recent years, judges have dismissed scores of cases in which workers presented evidence that supervisors referred to them using racial or gender slurs. In one federal district court, judges dismissed more than 80 percent of the race discrimination cases filed over a year. And when juries return verdicts in favor of employees, judges often second guess those verdicts, finding ways to nullify the jury's verdict and rule in favor of the employer. Most Americans assume that that an employee alleging workplace discrimination faces the same legal system as other litigants. After all, we do not usually think that legal rules vary depending upon the type of claim brought. The employment law scholars Sandra A. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas show in Unequal that our assumptions are wrong. Over the course of the last half century, employment discrimination claims have come to operate in a fundamentally different legal system than other claims. It is in many respects a parallel universe, one in which the legal system systematically favors employers over employees. A host of procedural, evidentiary, and substantive mechanisms serve as barriers for employees, making it extremely difficult for them to access the courts. Moreover, these mechanisms make it fairly easy for judges to dismiss a case prior to trial. Americans are unaware of how the system operates partly because they think that race and gender discrimination are in the process of fading away. But such discrimination still happens in the workplace, and workers now have little recourse to fight it legally. By tracing the modern history of employment discrimination, Sperino and Thomas provide an authoritative account of how our legal system evolved into an institution that is inherently biased against workers making rights claims.