Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Docan, Carol A. en
dc.date.accessioned 2013-07-22T16:58:23Z en
dc.date.available 2013-07-22T16:58:23Z en
dc.date.issued 1991 en
dc.identifier.citation Medical Trial Technique Quarterly 38(2), 145-153. (1991) en
dc.identifier.issn 0025-7591 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10211.2/3518 en
dc.description.abstract In a case commonly known as "Johnson Controls, "an employer had established a policy of refusing to employ fertile females in jobs which would expose them to lead. A federal appellate court upheld the company's Fetal Protection Plan but a state court found the plan unlawful. While the case against Johnson Controls was making its way through the court system, many people speculated that when the case reached the Supreme Court women· would be on the losing end of the decision. These speculations were based on the court's shift, in the last few years, to a conservative philosophy as a result of the appointments made by Presidents Reagan and Bush to the court. Justice Souter, President Bush's most recent appointee had only been on the bench one day when the case was argued before the Supreme Court in October 1990. But in March 1991, much to the surprise of all concerned, the court issued an opinion which declared that employers may not exclude women from jobs which could expose a fetus to toxic substances. en
dc.format.extent 5 pages en
dc.language.iso en en
dc.publisher Callaghan Publishing en
dc.rights Copyright 1991 Callaghan Publishing en
dc.title Risk and responsibility: the working women makes the choice, not the employer en
dc.type Article en


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


My Account

RSS Feeds