Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Human resources and labor relations

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Human resources and labor relations

The legal status of transsexuals in the workplace

Article Abstract:

Transsexual Americans have not been successful in employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These individuals have undergone sex reassignment surgery and experience many difficulties resulting from stereotyped thinking by employers and other employees. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibiting employment discrimination against handicapped persons has been interpreted by one Federal district court to apply to transsexuals. The psychiatric classification of transsexualism as a mental disorder underlies the designation of these persons as handicapped.

Author: Matusewitch, Eric
Publisher: Crain Communications, Inc.
Publication Name: Personnel Journal
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 0031-5745
Year: 1988
Transsexuals, Sex change

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Language rules can violate Title VII

Article Abstract:

Company language proficiency policies can violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if they deny equal employment without good business reasons to applicants or employees because they have physical, cultural, or linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), whose duties are to enforce Title VII, and the federal courts have been closely examining company language proficiency policies and upholding employers in court only when nondiscriminatory business reasons for the rules exists.

Author: Matusewitch, Eric
Publisher: Crain Communications, Inc.
Publication Name: Personnel Journal
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 0031-5745
Year: 1990
Powers and duties, Employment discrimination, Language policy

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Retirement: an executive decision?

Article Abstract:

Recent court case findings are discussed to illustrate the legal application of some of the issues addressed by the 1986 Age Discrimination in Employment Act Amendments, which prohibited mandatory retirement except in instances where employees are bona fide executives, and guidelines developed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The court cases reveal that firms must follow all suggested EEOC guidelines when applying the 'bona fide' exemption, and firms must realize retirement benefits must be nonforfeitable.

Author: Matusewitch, Eric
Publisher: Crain Communications, Inc.
Publication Name: Personnel Journal
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 0031-5745
Year: 1989
Mandatory retirement, Retirement age

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, United States. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: A positive response to AIDS in the workplace. Reference points. The consequences of tax evasion
  • Abstracts: Entry-level jobs: first rung on the employment ladder or economic dead end? Determinants of the decertification process: evidence from employer-initiated elections
  • Abstracts: On-the-job employee counseling: focus on performance. Why executives need a liberal arts education
  • Abstracts: Payroll and personnel: the new interface. Software: buy it right. The upfront issues of payroll and HRIS interface
  • Abstracts: Out to lunch: staff catering in the 1990s. The DIY approach to youth training. Can LENs provide a focus for local training needs?
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.