Sentences with phrase «for discriminatory purposes»

«Facebook's use and abuse of user data for discriminatory purposes needs to stop.

«Facebook's use and abuse of user data for discriminatory purposes needs to stop,» Lisa Rice, president and CEO of NFHA, said in a statement.

After the news organization contacted the giant social network, Facebook removed the anti-Semitic categories and says it will remove all self - reported targeting fields «to help ensure that targeting is not used for discriminatory purposes» until it can find a fix.

Not exact matches

The two can be seen together, however, insofar as the definition of discriminatory purpose holds for both public or private agents.

First, because most employees in the US are «at will», meaning, we can be fired at any time for any reason long as it's not discriminatory, we work long hours, are afraid of taking time away from work longer than a week, and certainly not for child care purposes.

Worse is that this sometimes signals to the greater public that these «new and improved» teacher evaluation systems are being used for more discriminatory purposes (i.e., to actually differentiate between good and bad teachers on some sort of discriminating continuum), or that, indeed, there is a normal distribution of teachers, as per their levels of effectiveness.

-- For purposes of paragraph (2)(C), in determining whether a first or subsequent violation has occurred, a determination in a single action, by judgment or settlement, that the covered entity has engaged in more than one discriminatory act shall be counted as a single violation.

You will not, and will not allow or authorize others to, use the Services or the Sites to take any actions that: (i) infringe on any third party's copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other proprietary rights or rights of publicity or privacy; (ii) violate any applicable law, statute, ordinance or regulation (including those regarding export control); (iii) are defamatory, trade libelous, threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, stalking, harassment, abusive, tortuous, hateful, discriminatory based on race, ethnicity, gender, sex or disability, pornographic or obscene; (iv) interfere with or disrupt any services or equipment with the intent of causing an excessive or disproportionate load on the Animal League or its licensors or suppliers» infrastructure; (v) involve knowingly distributing viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or other similar harmful or deleterious programming routines; (vi) involve the preparation and / or distribution of «junk mail», «spam», «chain letters», «pyramid schemes» or other deceptive online marketing practices or any unsolicited bulk email or unsolicited commercial email or otherwise in a manner that violate the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (CAN - SPAM Act of 2003); (vii) would encourage conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, federal or international laws, rules or regulations; (viii) involve the unauthorized entry to any machine accessible via the Services or interfere with the Sites or any servers or networks connected to the Sites or disobey any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of networks connected to the Sites, or attempt to breach the security of or disrupt Internet communications on the Sites (including without limitation accessing data to which you are not the intended recipient or logging into a server or account for which you are not expressly authorized); (ix) impersonate any person or entity, including, without limitation, one of the Animal League's or other's officers or employees, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity; (x) forge headers or otherwise manipulate identifiers in order to disguise the origin of any information transmitted through the Sites; (xi) collect or store personal data about other Animal League members, Site users or attempt to gain access to other Animal League members information, or otherwise mine information about Animal League members, Site users, or the Sites; (xii) execute any form of network monitoring or run a network analyzer or packet sniffer or other technology to intercept, decode, mine or display any packets used to communicate between the Sites» servers or any data not intended for you; (xiii) attempt to circumvent authentication or security of any content, host, network or account («cracking») on or from the Sites; or (xiv) are contrary to the Animal League's public image, goodwill, reputation or mission or otherwise not in furtherance of the Animal Leagues stated purposes.

The test to determine discriminatory conduct, in this case direct age discrimination, is set out in reg 3 of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1031)(which is now repealed and set out in s 13 (1) and (2) of the Equality Act 2010): «For the purposes of these Regulations, a person («A») discriminates against another person («B») if, on the grounds of B's age, A treats B less favourably than he treats or would treat other persons,... and A can not show the treatment or, as the case may be, provision, criterion or practice to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.»

The starting point is PM v United Kingdom (App no 6638/03)[2005] ECHR 504; where it was held that, for Art 14 purposes «a difference in treatment between persons in analogous or relevantly similar positions is discriminatory if it has no objective and reasonable justification».

Even where drug and alcohol testing policies are found to be discriminatory, they can be justifiable where an employer can establish that the testing is a bona fide (i.e - legitimate) requirement of the job for safety purposes.

At first instance Knowles J was prepared to assume for material purposes that the positions of spouses and cohabitees were analogous so that the 12 - month condition was prima facie discriminatory.

The CBSA was ordered to cease its discriminatory practices against employees seeking accommodation based on family status for the purposes of childcare responsibilities and to pay compensation and damages.

To amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes.

The bill's stated purpose is «to amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes.»

Section 2 of the CHRA provides that the purpose of the CHRA is to «extend the laws in Canada to give effect... to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.»

Aside from the Indian Act which I continue to believe is Canada's most discriminatory legislation (it is pretty hard to argue that the Indian Act's legislative purpose was anything other than to contain and control the Indian peoples of Canada — of course, this is a conversation for a different day), I can think of no other provincial or federal legislation that is as overtly discriminatory as Bill 62.

In Canada (Attorney General) v. Bodnar, the employer sought judicial review of a decision of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board (Board) in which the Board held that the inclusion of disability - related absences and absences taken for the purposes of family caregiver leave in an attendance management policy was discriminatory.

For practical purposes, a breach may arise: (i) if a state may makes discriminatory legislative reforms which adversely affect the international investment; or (ii) if a state arbitrarily or capriciously denies tax exemptions to international investors in respect of revenues or profits generated by their investment; or (iii) if a state discriminates against an international investor by refusing to grant or renew permits; or (iv) if a state expropriates investment assets without due and proper compensation paid to the investor etc..

Whether the use of credit checks for employment purposes is discriminatory to certain job applicants — which ESR also named Trend # 1 in its Third Annual Top Ten Trends in the Background Screening Industry for 2010 — is a question that will be asked as long as employers run credit checks on job applicants with money troubles.

Critics of using credit histories for employment purposes said the practice can have a disparate and discriminatory impact on protected groups, including people of color, women, and the disabled.

[19] Expropriation of property belonging to a particular racial group for different purposes or on lesser terms is discriminatory.