Follow POL on Twitter I have a column in today's San Francisco Examiner discussing the gender discrimination class action cases against Wal-Mart and Costco. Many of my arguments will be familiar to our readers who saw my earlier postings on the Wal-Mart case (Aug. 16, Jul. 8, Jul. 2). See also our editor's comments Jun. 29, and his links to further commentaries here and here.
Examiner piece
Related Entries:
- Hans Bader on EU's proposed gender quotas for corporate boards
- EEOC: discrimination against criminals is illegal
- Hans Bader uncovers a Catch-22 in EEOC enforcement
- Around the web, August 31
- Self-parody NY Times op-ed department: "Ugly? You May Have A Case"
- Bloomberg win on EEOC work/life balance suit
- Hymowitz on the gender gap
- Damned if you do files: Briscoe v. New Haven
- Around the web, August 15
- Jamie Leigh Jones lawsuit falling apart
- Podcast on Wal-Mart v. Dukes
- Does Title VII require work-life balance? II
- Does Title VII require work-life balance?
- But buttons that say $1.08 wouldn't be helpful
- EEOC challenges use of credit history in hiring
 |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
 |
| Bridget Carroll Press Officer, Manhattan Institute bcarroll@manhattan-institute.org |
