:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:就業歧視爭議中禁止雇主報復規範在美國之最新發展--聯邦最高法院在Southwest Medical Center v. Nassar一案判決之評析
作者:焦興鎧
書刊名:美國最高法院重要判決之研究. 2010-2013;黃昭元 (主編)
頁次:1-41
出版日期:2015
出版項:臺北:新學林
主題關鍵詞:就業歧視美國最高法院雇主報復
學門:法律學
資料類型:專書論文
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:3
期刊論文
1.Brake, Deborah L.(2005)。Retaliation。Minnesota Law Review,90(1),18-105。  new window
2.Kline, Barbara S.(2009)。Comment, "oppose" by any other name: The Title VII opposition clause and Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee。Oklahoma City University Law Review,34(3),591-608。  new window
3.LaPointe, Martin K.(2008)。The Supreme Court broadens the expansion of retaliation claims: CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries and Go-mez-Perez v. Potter。Labor Law Journal,59(4),318-330。  new window
4.Mota, Sue Ann、Waldman, Erin E.(2010)。Employers beware: Retaliation prohibited by the Court in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville, CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, and Gomez-Perez v. Potter。Hamline Law Review,33(1),1-18。  new window
5.Mowrey, Megan E.(2009)。Discriminatory retaliation: Title VII protection for the cooperating employee。Pace Law Review,29(4),689-737。  new window
6.Zimmer, Michael J.(2009)。A pro-employee Supreme Court?: The retaliation decisions。South Carolina Law Review,60(4),918-957。  new window
7.焦興鎧(20090300)。美國就業上性傾向歧視爭議之探討。歐美研究,39(1),29-77。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.焦興鎧(20130600)。美國最高法院對工作場所性騷擾爭議之最新判決:Crawford v. Nashville一案之評析。歐美研究,43(2),255-304。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.焦興鎧(20100700)。就業歧視之新興議題解析。經社法制論叢,46,85-121。  延伸查詢new window
10.Bodie, Matthew T.(2013)。The Roberts Court and the Law of Human Resources。Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law,34,159-217。  new window
11.DiMugno, John K.(2013)。United States Supreme Court Curtails Federal Protection of Consumers and Employees。California Tort Reporter,34,1-12。  new window
12.Drachsler, David A.(2013)。Supreme Court Sets High Bar for Title VII Retaliation Claims。Labor Law Journal,64,205-210。  new window
13.Feeney, John J.(2010)。Comment, An Inevitable Progression in the Scope of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Provision: Third Party Retaliation Claims。Capital University Law Review,38,643-671。  new window
14.Fentin, Susan G.(2013)。Two Supreme Court Decisions Are Big Wins for Employers。Massachusetts Employment Law Letter,24(5)。  new window
15.Flynn, Mark(2013)。Unlawful Retaliation and Workplace Investigations--Lines, Bars, and "X" Factors。The Colorado Lawyer,42,85-91。  new window
16.Franklin, David L.(2009)。What Kind of Business-Friendly Court? Explaining the Chamber of Commerce's Success at the Roberts Court。Santa Clara Law Review,49,1019-1062。  new window
17.Krimski, Matthew A.(2014)。University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar: Undermining the National Policy Against Discrimination。Maryland Law Review Endnotes,73,132-160。  new window
18.LaPointe, Martin K.(2006)。The Supreme Court Sets the Standard for Title VII Retaliation Claims: Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway v. White。Labor Law Journal,57,205-215。  new window
19.Oderda, Gina(2010)。Note, Opposition at the Water Cooler: The Treatment of Non-Purposive Conduct under Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Clause。Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy,17,241-257。  new window
20.Phillips, Edward G.、Morrow, Bandon C.(2013)。Retaliation Claims: More Difficult Standards Under 'Nassar' and 'Fergusou'。Tennessee Bar Journal,49,32-34。  new window
21.Rupe, Alan、Stitt, Jason、Kanaga, Mark(2014)。U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies the Plaintiff's Burden of Proof in Title VII Retaliation Actions。Journal of the Kansas Bar Association,83,24-29。  new window
22.Twomey, David P.(2011)。Employee Retaliation Claims under the Supreme Court's Burlington, Crawford and Thompson Decisions: Important Implications for Employers。Labor Law Journal,62,57-65。  new window
圖書
1.Lindemann, Barbara、Grossman, Paul(1996)。Employment Discrimination Law。Washington, DC:Bureau of National Affairs。  new window
2.Congressional Digest Corporation(2013)。LGBT Rights in the Workplace。MD:Congressional Digest Corporation。  new window
圖書論文
1.焦興鎧(19950000)。美國聯邦最高法院與就業歧視問題。勞工法與勞工權利之保障:美國勞工法論文集。臺北:月旦。new window  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE