Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Sexual harassment in the workplace in US labor law has been considered a form of discrimination on the basis of sex in the United States since the mid-1970s. [1] [2] There are two forms of sexual harassment recognized by United States law: quid pro quo sexual harassment (requiring an employee to tolerate sexual harassment to keep their job, receive a tangible benefit, or avoid punishment) and ...
However, to recover damages, the employee must also establish all other elements of the claim, such as that the employee engaged in protected conduct such as making a report of discrimination or reporting an employer's violation of law, and also establish that the employer created the hostile work environment, at least in part, because the ...
However, a 2004 survey of a random sample of employees at a heavy machinery assembly plant shows that women are more sensitive and receptive of workplace harassment, and therefore women have "a greater propensity to drink". [34] The negative drinking effects are more severe for women than they are for men. [33]
Non-inclusive companies have poor retention, and employees who stay are checked out. Workplace discrimination is driving LBGTQI+ employees to quit their jobs. Here’s how companies can step up ...
In the U.S., federal anti-discrimination law prohibits discrimination by employers against employees based on age, race, gender, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity), religion, national origin, and physical or mental disability.
A trial began Monday for three former Chipotle managers in Cincinnati who are suing the chain because they claim their boss wrongly terminated them. Former Chipotle employees sued a store manager ...
Ten Sweetgreen employees are suing the salad chain, alleging racial discrimination at seven of its New York City restaurants.. The lawsuit, filed Thursday in New York Supreme Court in the Bronx ...
Bostock v. Clayton County –— a landmark United States Supreme Court case in 2020 in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of their sexual orientation or gender identity; Civil Rights Act of 1866 [3] Civil Rights Act of 1871 [4] Civil Rights Act of 1957 [5]