Prohibition against
discrimination in employment extends beyond employer - employee relationship, Supreme Court of Canada rules
Not exact matches
The Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),
in the absence of a specific prohibition against
discrimination for being gay, has
extended its enforcement
in a similar way.
To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against
discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights
in public facilities and public education, to
extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent
discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal
Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.
In this edition we look at a recent high profile sex discrimination case against the Met Police, proposals to extend paternity leave to six weeks, the latest in our series on injunctions and the employment law changes that come in tomorro
In this edition we look at a recent high profile sex
discrimination case against the Met Police, proposals to
extend paternity leave to six weeks, the latest
in our series on injunctions and the employment law changes that come in tomorro
in our series on injunctions and the
employment law changes that come
in tomorro
in tomorrow.
In the case of an alleged unlawful practice occurring in a State which has a law prohibiting discrimination in employment because of age and establishing or authorizing a State authority to grant or seek relief from such discriminatory practice, no suit may be brought under section 626 of this title [section 7] before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated: Provided, That such sixty - day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State la
In the case of an alleged unlawful practice occurring
in a State which has a law prohibiting discrimination in employment because of age and establishing or authorizing a State authority to grant or seek relief from such discriminatory practice, no suit may be brought under section 626 of this title [section 7] before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated: Provided, That such sixty - day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State la
in a State which has a law prohibiting
discrimination in employment because of age and establishing or authorizing a State authority to grant or seek relief from such discriminatory practice, no suit may be brought under section 626 of this title [section 7] before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated: Provided, That such sixty - day period shall be extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State la
in employment because of age and establishing or authorizing a State authority to grant or seek relief from such discriminatory practice, no suit may be brought under section 626 of this title [section 7] before the expiration of sixty days after proceedings have been commenced under the State law, unless such proceedings have been earlier terminated: Provided, That such sixty - day period shall be
extended to one hundred and twenty days during the first year after the effective date of such State law.
The scope of s. 13 (1)(b) is not limited to protecting employees solely from superiors
in the workplace; its protection
extends to all employees who suffer
discrimination with a sufficient connection to their
employment context; and that may include (as here)
discrimination by their co-workers, even when those co-workers have a different employer.