美国禁止就业歧视法律制度研究
|
摘要
争取平等、反对歧视是人类社会一项长期而艰巨的任务,反对就业领域中的歧视现象更是反歧视斗争的重点之一。歧视是占据优势地位的社会群体针对弱势群体的差别对待,是对平等精神的严重违反。就业歧视不仅侵犯公民的平等权和劳动权,而且使那些在政治、经济、社会、文化等方面处于劣势地位的群体进一步被边缘化。就业歧视使历史形成的职业分隔现象得以维持和泛化。普遍存在的职业分隔现象不可避免地会扩大不同社会群体之间的鸿沟,并进而加剧相互之间的矛盾和冲突。职业分隔必然会使社会融合与和谐的愿景成为泡影。虽然我国早就确立了平等、非歧视的就业政策,但一直未能建立起可执行的反就业歧视法律制度。美国禁止就业歧视法律制度是一项建立较早、相当完善,且成效显著的制度。对它进行研究,特别是实证研究,对建立我国的相关制度具有相当重要的借鉴意义。
文章从实证法的角度,对美国禁止就业歧视法律制度进行了深入、全面、系统的研究。全文共分七章。
第1章引言,主要是对研究的意义、现状、内容和方法进行阐述。
第2章主要阐述美国禁止就业歧视法律制度的演进历程、法律渊源和其中的若干基本概念。法律的平等保护原则是美国反就业歧视立法的宪法基础。在美国宪法第十四修正案制定后,平等保护原则在美国经历了一个漫长而又曲折的历程。二十世纪六十年代的民权运动为广泛的民权立法奠定了基础。《1964年民权法》第七章是美国反就业歧视联邦立法的集大成者。该法禁止雇主、劳工组织和职业介绍机构基于种族、肤色、原国籍、宗教、性别的就业歧视行为,并确立了反就业歧视的基本原则、规则和执行机构、程序等。其他的主要法律渊源还包括《1967年就业年龄歧视法》、《1990年残疾美国人法》等。根据联邦法院阐明的判例法规则,就业歧视行为分为差别待遇歧视和差别影响歧视两种类型。这两种歧视行为不但其表现形式有异,而且适用不同的证明责任分配规则和抗辩理由。
第3章主要论述美国就业歧视法所禁止的就业歧视行为。雇主因为某人的种族、肤色、原国籍、宗教、性别、年龄或残疾而失于或拒绝雇佣或解雇该人,或者在雇佣的报酬、条款、条件或特别待遇方面歧视该人的,属于非法的雇佣作法;或者是采取任何方式限制、隔离或区分其雇员或应聘者,从而可能剥夺或势必剥夺该人的就业机会或在其他方面对该人的雇员地位造成不利影响的,同样属于禁止的歧视行为。就业歧视行为的表现形式各异,并且因为歧视原因的不同而有所差异。本章分别对雇主基于各种原因而发生的常见歧视行为进行了详细的论述。特别是对职场骚扰这种新的歧视形式阐明了相关法律规则。除非雇主具备规定的抗辩理由,雇主应当对工作场所中发生的骚扰行为承担直接责任或者是替代责任。
第4章主要研究对就业歧视行为的证明,这部分内容也是美国禁止就业歧视法律制度中的精髓之一。差别待遇歧视要求证明雇主具有歧视意图。即使没有直接证据,也可以依据证明责任转移框架通过间接证据来证明雇主的歧视意图。对于差别待遇歧视指控,雇主可以真实职业资格和资历制度作为抗辩理由。差别影响歧视不要求证明雇主存有歧视意图。被歧视人在证明雇主的某项作法造成差别影响之后,即转由雇主承担证明责任。对于差别影响歧视指控,雇主可以业务必要性和客观的就业测试作为抗辩理由。
第5章研究的是反就业歧视法中一个最有争议性的问题——积极行动。如果仅仅出于反歧视的目的,只需要求雇主平等对待所有人。积极行动则要求雇主在特定条件下,向少数族群或妇女提供优惠待遇。为了消除先前的歧视性环境对少数族群或妇女造成的不利影响,矫正少数族群或妇女雇员比例过低的问题,或者是矫正他们面临的不利地位,雇主可以采取自愿的积极行为。联邦机构、联邦政府合同承包人和联邦资金接受人还应当制定并执行积极行动计划,拟定雇佣少数族群成员或妇女的数量目标以及达到该目标的时间表,以矫正少数族群或妇女雇员比例过低的问题。联邦法院在案件审理过程中,也可以命令某些雇主、劳工组织采取积极行动。
第6章研究就业歧视争议的解决。与其他民事争议的解决大为迥异的是,寻求法律救济的被歧视人必须在规定的时效期间内,向平等就业机会委员会提出告诉。经过平等就业机会委员会的行政程序之后,被歧视人才可向联邦法院提起诉讼。平等就业机会委员会也可以自己的名义提起诉讼,为被歧视人寻求法律救济。法庭判给的法律救济包括报酬损失、补偿性和惩罚性赔偿、积极行动、律师费等。本章还深入研究了就业歧视争议的替代纠纷解决机制,即调解和仲裁。
第7章在前面研究的基础上,对本研究进行了简要的总结,并对我国的反就业歧视立法提出了初步建议。
Striving for equality and antidiscrimination might be the difficult and lasting mission of the human society. Antidiscrimination in workplace is one of the most important tasks in the battle for such antidiscrimination. Discrimination, which treats inferior classes differently by one or more dominant social groups, offends the equal principle. Furthermore, employment discrimination encroaches one’s equal and labor rights, and makes the inferior classes, within unfavorable political, economic, social and cultural situation, moving steadily to the social margin adversely either. Employment discrimination would perpetuate and generalize the historical occupational segregation. Thus, the pervasive occupational segregation would inevitably expand the unfair gap of the different social classes, and more than that it will bring the conflicts among such classes. Without doubt occupational segregation will make the perspective of social integration and harmonization falling through. Chinese government has established the equal nondiscrimination employment policies for a long time. However, the government has no practicable employment antidiscrimination law for implementation. On the other side, the U.S. employment discrimination law was enacted early and reaches perfect effects. Studies on the U.S. employment discrimination law, especially with respect to empirical study, would offer a significant reference for us to establish antidiscrimination systems.
Within this dissertation, the author performs a systematical and comprehensive approach on the U.S. employment discrimination law with the angle of positive law. The full dissertation consists of seven chapters.
Chapter one researches mainly on the significance, research status, contents and methods of this study.
Chapter two focuses on the history, source of law and several important concepts in the U.S. employment discrimination law. The equal protection principle serves as the constitutional basis of the U.S. employment discrimination law. After the enacting of the Fourteenth Amendment, the equal protect principle experienced a long and sinuate courses. The civil rights movement in the 1960s settled the bases for comprehensive civil rights legislations. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 supplies a synthesizer of the U.S. employment discrimination federal legislation. Title VII prohibits employer, labor union and employment agency from employment discrimination because of one’s race, color, national original, religion or sex. Title VII establishes the principles and rules of the employment discrimination law, and the federal agency and its procedures for enforcement. Other sources of the law include the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, etc. According to the case law rules clarified by federal courts, employment discrimination includes disparate treatment and disparate impact. For each of such discrimination, their behavior forms, proof burden and defenses would be different.
Chapter three addresses the employment discrimination conducts prohibited by the U.S. employment discrimination law. It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to fail or refuse to fire or to discharge any person, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of his/her race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disabilities. It is prohibited for an employer to limit, segregate, or classify his employee or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disabilities. The employment discrimination conducts are variable on the basis of said situation. This chapter discusses detailed universal discrimination in different causes on which an employer discriminates any individual. Particularly, this chapter states the relevant legal rules to harassment appeared newly in workplace. An employer shall bear direct liability or vicarious liability for such harassment in workplace, unless s/he has one or more defenses.
Chapter four, the author researches the proof of employment discrimination, which would be one of the quintessence of the U.S. employment discrimination law. Disparate treatment needs proving the discriminatory intent of an employer. If the discriminated individual has no direct evidences concerning the employer’s intent, s/he could produce the environmental evidences to prove an employer’s discriminatory intent, according to the burden shifting framework. An employer could defend his/her counter-claim based on bona fide occupational qualification or seniority systems in front of the plaintiff’s disparate treatment charge. On the other hand, disparate impact requires no evidence concerning the discriminatory intent. After the discriminated individual has proved the disparate effect of an employer’s employment practice, the burden of proof would be shifted to the employer, who shall demonstrate that the practice is related to the nature of the job and is consistent with the business necessity or defense with objective employment test.
Chapter five studies the most controversial questions of the employment discrimination law: affirmative action. It merely needs requiring employers to treat any individual equally, if the sole purpose of the employment discrimination law is antidiscrimination. Affirmative action requests employers providing preferential treatment to minorities or women in specific situation. An employer may adopt voluntary affirmative action to eliminate the adverse impact on minorities or women of the prior discriminatory environment, to redress the underemployment of minorities or women, or to remedy the unfavorable situations faced by them. Federal agencies, federal governmental contractors and federal fund recipients are obligated to develop and implement an affirmative action plan which tackles the numerical goals for employing minorities or women and the timetable to carry out it to resolve the underemployment. Federal courts may, with their discretion, deliver the order for affirmative action remedies.
Chapter six involves the resolution of employment discrimination disputes. Different from other civil disputes, a discriminated individual pursuing for remedies must file a complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within the period of prescription. Finalized the EEOC administrative procedures she/he can bring a lawsuit at the federal courts. To pursue remedies for the victims of employment discriminations, EEOC itself can file lawsuit at the federal district courts. The remedies awarded by courts include backpay, frontpay, compensatory and punitive damages, affirmative action and/or attorneys’fees, etc. This chapter also expounds the alternative dispute resolutions to employment discrimination: mediation and arbitration.
Chapter seven draws the conclusion of this study briefly based on the prior research, and recommends a few primary proposals for China’s legislation of employment discrimination.
文章从实证法的角度,对美国禁止就业歧视法律制度进行了深入、全面、系统的研究。全文共分七章。
第1章引言,主要是对研究的意义、现状、内容和方法进行阐述。
第2章主要阐述美国禁止就业歧视法律制度的演进历程、法律渊源和其中的若干基本概念。法律的平等保护原则是美国反就业歧视立法的宪法基础。在美国宪法第十四修正案制定后,平等保护原则在美国经历了一个漫长而又曲折的历程。二十世纪六十年代的民权运动为广泛的民权立法奠定了基础。《1964年民权法》第七章是美国反就业歧视联邦立法的集大成者。该法禁止雇主、劳工组织和职业介绍机构基于种族、肤色、原国籍、宗教、性别的就业歧视行为,并确立了反就业歧视的基本原则、规则和执行机构、程序等。其他的主要法律渊源还包括《1967年就业年龄歧视法》、《1990年残疾美国人法》等。根据联邦法院阐明的判例法规则,就业歧视行为分为差别待遇歧视和差别影响歧视两种类型。这两种歧视行为不但其表现形式有异,而且适用不同的证明责任分配规则和抗辩理由。
第3章主要论述美国就业歧视法所禁止的就业歧视行为。雇主因为某人的种族、肤色、原国籍、宗教、性别、年龄或残疾而失于或拒绝雇佣或解雇该人,或者在雇佣的报酬、条款、条件或特别待遇方面歧视该人的,属于非法的雇佣作法;或者是采取任何方式限制、隔离或区分其雇员或应聘者,从而可能剥夺或势必剥夺该人的就业机会或在其他方面对该人的雇员地位造成不利影响的,同样属于禁止的歧视行为。就业歧视行为的表现形式各异,并且因为歧视原因的不同而有所差异。本章分别对雇主基于各种原因而发生的常见歧视行为进行了详细的论述。特别是对职场骚扰这种新的歧视形式阐明了相关法律规则。除非雇主具备规定的抗辩理由,雇主应当对工作场所中发生的骚扰行为承担直接责任或者是替代责任。
第4章主要研究对就业歧视行为的证明,这部分内容也是美国禁止就业歧视法律制度中的精髓之一。差别待遇歧视要求证明雇主具有歧视意图。即使没有直接证据,也可以依据证明责任转移框架通过间接证据来证明雇主的歧视意图。对于差别待遇歧视指控,雇主可以真实职业资格和资历制度作为抗辩理由。差别影响歧视不要求证明雇主存有歧视意图。被歧视人在证明雇主的某项作法造成差别影响之后,即转由雇主承担证明责任。对于差别影响歧视指控,雇主可以业务必要性和客观的就业测试作为抗辩理由。
第5章研究的是反就业歧视法中一个最有争议性的问题——积极行动。如果仅仅出于反歧视的目的,只需要求雇主平等对待所有人。积极行动则要求雇主在特定条件下,向少数族群或妇女提供优惠待遇。为了消除先前的歧视性环境对少数族群或妇女造成的不利影响,矫正少数族群或妇女雇员比例过低的问题,或者是矫正他们面临的不利地位,雇主可以采取自愿的积极行为。联邦机构、联邦政府合同承包人和联邦资金接受人还应当制定并执行积极行动计划,拟定雇佣少数族群成员或妇女的数量目标以及达到该目标的时间表,以矫正少数族群或妇女雇员比例过低的问题。联邦法院在案件审理过程中,也可以命令某些雇主、劳工组织采取积极行动。
第6章研究就业歧视争议的解决。与其他民事争议的解决大为迥异的是,寻求法律救济的被歧视人必须在规定的时效期间内,向平等就业机会委员会提出告诉。经过平等就业机会委员会的行政程序之后,被歧视人才可向联邦法院提起诉讼。平等就业机会委员会也可以自己的名义提起诉讼,为被歧视人寻求法律救济。法庭判给的法律救济包括报酬损失、补偿性和惩罚性赔偿、积极行动、律师费等。本章还深入研究了就业歧视争议的替代纠纷解决机制,即调解和仲裁。
第7章在前面研究的基础上,对本研究进行了简要的总结,并对我国的反就业歧视立法提出了初步建议。
Striving for equality and antidiscrimination might be the difficult and lasting mission of the human society. Antidiscrimination in workplace is one of the most important tasks in the battle for such antidiscrimination. Discrimination, which treats inferior classes differently by one or more dominant social groups, offends the equal principle. Furthermore, employment discrimination encroaches one’s equal and labor rights, and makes the inferior classes, within unfavorable political, economic, social and cultural situation, moving steadily to the social margin adversely either. Employment discrimination would perpetuate and generalize the historical occupational segregation. Thus, the pervasive occupational segregation would inevitably expand the unfair gap of the different social classes, and more than that it will bring the conflicts among such classes. Without doubt occupational segregation will make the perspective of social integration and harmonization falling through. Chinese government has established the equal nondiscrimination employment policies for a long time. However, the government has no practicable employment antidiscrimination law for implementation. On the other side, the U.S. employment discrimination law was enacted early and reaches perfect effects. Studies on the U.S. employment discrimination law, especially with respect to empirical study, would offer a significant reference for us to establish antidiscrimination systems.
Within this dissertation, the author performs a systematical and comprehensive approach on the U.S. employment discrimination law with the angle of positive law. The full dissertation consists of seven chapters.
Chapter one researches mainly on the significance, research status, contents and methods of this study.
Chapter two focuses on the history, source of law and several important concepts in the U.S. employment discrimination law. The equal protection principle serves as the constitutional basis of the U.S. employment discrimination law. After the enacting of the Fourteenth Amendment, the equal protect principle experienced a long and sinuate courses. The civil rights movement in the 1960s settled the bases for comprehensive civil rights legislations. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 supplies a synthesizer of the U.S. employment discrimination federal legislation. Title VII prohibits employer, labor union and employment agency from employment discrimination because of one’s race, color, national original, religion or sex. Title VII establishes the principles and rules of the employment discrimination law, and the federal agency and its procedures for enforcement. Other sources of the law include the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, etc. According to the case law rules clarified by federal courts, employment discrimination includes disparate treatment and disparate impact. For each of such discrimination, their behavior forms, proof burden and defenses would be different.
Chapter three addresses the employment discrimination conducts prohibited by the U.S. employment discrimination law. It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to fail or refuse to fire or to discharge any person, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of his/her race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disabilities. It is prohibited for an employer to limit, segregate, or classify his employee or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disabilities. The employment discrimination conducts are variable on the basis of said situation. This chapter discusses detailed universal discrimination in different causes on which an employer discriminates any individual. Particularly, this chapter states the relevant legal rules to harassment appeared newly in workplace. An employer shall bear direct liability or vicarious liability for such harassment in workplace, unless s/he has one or more defenses.
Chapter four, the author researches the proof of employment discrimination, which would be one of the quintessence of the U.S. employment discrimination law. Disparate treatment needs proving the discriminatory intent of an employer. If the discriminated individual has no direct evidences concerning the employer’s intent, s/he could produce the environmental evidences to prove an employer’s discriminatory intent, according to the burden shifting framework. An employer could defend his/her counter-claim based on bona fide occupational qualification or seniority systems in front of the plaintiff’s disparate treatment charge. On the other hand, disparate impact requires no evidence concerning the discriminatory intent. After the discriminated individual has proved the disparate effect of an employer’s employment practice, the burden of proof would be shifted to the employer, who shall demonstrate that the practice is related to the nature of the job and is consistent with the business necessity or defense with objective employment test.
Chapter five studies the most controversial questions of the employment discrimination law: affirmative action. It merely needs requiring employers to treat any individual equally, if the sole purpose of the employment discrimination law is antidiscrimination. Affirmative action requests employers providing preferential treatment to minorities or women in specific situation. An employer may adopt voluntary affirmative action to eliminate the adverse impact on minorities or women of the prior discriminatory environment, to redress the underemployment of minorities or women, or to remedy the unfavorable situations faced by them. Federal agencies, federal governmental contractors and federal fund recipients are obligated to develop and implement an affirmative action plan which tackles the numerical goals for employing minorities or women and the timetable to carry out it to resolve the underemployment. Federal courts may, with their discretion, deliver the order for affirmative action remedies.
Chapter six involves the resolution of employment discrimination disputes. Different from other civil disputes, a discriminated individual pursuing for remedies must file a complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within the period of prescription. Finalized the EEOC administrative procedures she/he can bring a lawsuit at the federal courts. To pursue remedies for the victims of employment discriminations, EEOC itself can file lawsuit at the federal district courts. The remedies awarded by courts include backpay, frontpay, compensatory and punitive damages, affirmative action and/or attorneys’fees, etc. This chapter also expounds the alternative dispute resolutions to employment discrimination: mediation and arbitration.
Chapter seven draws the conclusion of this study briefly based on the prior research, and recommends a few primary proposals for China’s legislation of employment discrimination.
引文
1如受到全社会广泛关注的“张先著乙肝歧视案”,被评为人民网2003年十大新闻、中央电视台“2003年新闻人物”、司法部、中宣部、中央电视台“法治的力量:2004年度法治人物”等,且被认为是反就业歧视第一个成功案例,法院也是以被告作出的具体行政行为主要证据不足为由作出判决的,而不是以被告进行就业歧视为由判决的。参见:周伟.中国的劳动就业歧视:法律与现实[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.317-319
3如:刘勇.就业公平保障法律制度研究[D].重庆大学博士学位论文.2005;翁里、宋丽燕.对就业歧视的法理探讨[J].兰州学刊.2004.6;娄耀雄.我国“就业歧视”的法理分析及对策[J].北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版).2004.3;肖玉.我国制度性就业歧视的法理学分析[D].吉林大学硕士学位论文.2005.
4如:(台)焦兴铠.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美所”,1996;李薇薇、Lisa Stearns. 禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006;喻术红.反就业歧视法律问题之比较研究[J].中国法学.2005.1;伍劲松.美国两性工作平等制度研究[J].法学家.2004.3;李炳安.欧盟与美国两性工作平等法制之比较[J].武汉大学学报(哲学与社会科学版).2004.3;曾恂.美国反就业歧视立法的启示[J].南方经济.2003.5.
5如:周伟.中国的劳动就业歧视:法律与现实[M].北京:法律出版社,2006;孙劲悦.关于就业年龄歧视原因的调查分析[J].财经问题研究.2004.4;赵友宝.女性就业歧视的经济学分析[J].山东科技大学学报(社科版).2005.1;卢汉龙、朱迪.社经视野下的就业歧视[J].社会观察.2005.7.
6如:竹文君.试论就业歧视及其公法规制[J].河北法学.2004.10;李继霞.关于就业歧视问题的法律思考[J]. 山东社会科学.2005.10;叶静漪、魏倩.健康就业歧视若干法律问题研究[J].人权.2004.3;许杏彬、张迎.论我国就业歧视之法律救济[J].中国劳动.2006.3.
8对此过程的详细叙述参见:邱小平.法律的平等保护——美国宪法第十四修正案第一款研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.40-49
9 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.)36(1873); Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3(1883); Hodges v. United States, 203 U.S. 1(1906).
10 Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
11 Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), at 551.
12 Brown v. Broad of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
13 Payne v. Western & A.R.R.. Co., 81 Tenn. 507, 519-20 (1884); Finger v. Koch & Schilling Brewing Co., 13 Mo.App. 310(1883); Martin v. New York Life Ins. Co., 148 N. Y. 117, 42 N. E. 416(1895).
14 H.R. 3986, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by Scanlon (Dem., Pa.); H.R. 4004, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by Dawson (Dem., Ill.); H.R. 4005, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by LaFollette (Rep., Ind.).
16《1967年就业年龄歧视法》编入美国法典第29编第621条-第634条。
17《1990年残疾美国人法》编入美国法典第42编第12101条及以下。
18 See H.R. Rep. No. 485, 101st Cong., 2d sess., pt. 2, at 32(1990). See also Jane West, The Social and Policy Context of the Act, in The Americans with Disabilities Act: From Policy to Practice 5 (Jane West, ed. 1991).
19 42 U.S.C.§12101.
20《1973年康复法》编入美国法典第29编第701-794条。
21 29 U.S.C.§206(d)(1).
22 McAuliffe v. Mayor of New Bedford, 155 Mass. 216, 29 N.E. 517 (1892); Scopes v. Tennessee, 154 Tenn. 105, 289 S.W. 363 (1927).
23 Harless v. First National Bank, 162 W.Va. 116, 246 S.E. 2d 270 (1978).
24 Bell & Howell Co., 213 NLRB 407(1974), enforced 598 F. 2d 136 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
25 NLRB V. Reed & Prince Mfg. Co., 205 F.2d 131 (1st Cir. 1953). Wichita Eagle & Beacon Pub. Co., 222 NLRB 742 (1976).
26《1993年家庭及医疗休假法》编入美国法典第29编第2601条及以下。See, 29U.S.C.§2601 et seq.
27 Executive Order No. 11478, 34 Fed. Reg. 12985 (1969).
28 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(a).
29 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(b).
30 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(c).
31 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(d).
32 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3(a).
33 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3(b).
34参见以下三个指令第2条:《男女平等待遇指令》76/207/EEC (as amended by 2002/73EC)、《种族歧视指令》2000/43/EC及《就业歧视指令》2002/78/EC。引自:李薇薇、Lisa Stearns.禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.27
36 See, e.g., Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 985-86 (1988).
37 See, e.g., Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424(1971); Wards Cove Packing Co., v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 645-646(1989).
38 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
39 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989).
40 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(m).
41 42 U.S.C.§2000e (f).
42 Restatement (Second) of Agency§220 (2) (1958).
43 42 U.S.C.§2000e (d).
44 See Bradley v. Pizzaco of Nebraska, 7 F. 3d 797, 798-99 (8th Cir. 1993).
45 See El-Hakem v. BJY, Inc., 415 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2005),法院裁定,姓名通常代表着其种族或民族。
46 See Tetro v. Elliott Popham Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, & GMC Trucks, Inc., 173 F.3d 988, 994-95 (6th Cir. 1999).
47 EEOC, Compliance Manual, Section 15: Race and Color Discrimination, pp.4-6.
48 See McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., 427 U.S. 273, 208 (1976),法院认为,第七章禁止针对所有人,包括白人的种族歧视。
49 See Mattioda v. White, 323 F.3d 1288 (10th Cir. 2003).
50 See Phelan v. City of Chicago, 347 F.3d 679, 684-85 (7th Cir. 2003).
51 See Walker v. Secretary of the Treasury, IRS, 713 F. Supp. 403, 405-08 (N.D. Ga. 1989).
52 See Santiago v. Stryker Corp., 10 F. Supp. 2d 93 (D.P.R. 1998).
53 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
54 110 Cong. Rec. 14270 (1964).
55 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324 (1977).
56 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 91 S.Ct. 849, 28 L.Ed 2d 158 (1971).
57 See Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Comm’n of City and County of San Francisco, 395 F. Supp. 378, 380-81 (D.C. Cal. 1976), cited with approval in Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977).
58 See Bryant v. Begin Manage Program, 281 F. Supp. 2d 561 (E.D.N.Y. 2003).
59 See Compare United States v. City of Warren, MI, 138 F. 3d 1083, 1094 (6th Cir. 1998), and NAACP v. Town of Harrison, NJ, 940 F. 2d 792, 799-805 (3d Cir. 1991).
60 See Ferrill v. The Parker Group, Inc., 168 F.3d 468 (11th Cir. 1999).
61 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3 (a).
62 See Johnson v. University of Cincinnati, 215 F.3d 561, 579-81 (6th Cir. 2000).
63 See Balicao v. University of Minnesota, 737 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1984), and Smith v. Secretary of Navy, 659 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
64 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors, I, 1999.
65 See Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 22 (1993).该案是一个关于性骚扰的案件,但是该案确定的这两项条件仍然适用于所有的违反第七章或者是《残疾美国人法》和《就业年龄歧视法》的骚扰案件。
66 Kang v. U. Lim America, 296 F. 3d 810, 817 (9th Cir. 2002).
67 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 80-81, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed. 2d 201 (1998).
68 Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. at 21 (1993).
69 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 15: Race and Color Discrimination, 15-37.
70 See Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc., 333 F. 3d 906 (8th Cir. 2003), and Williams v. New York City Housing Auth., 154 F. Supp. 2d 820 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
71 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 2290, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998) ; Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S. Ct. 2269 (1998).
72 See Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004).
73 See Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 765, 118 S.Ct. 2257, 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998).
74 Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742,118 S. Ct. 2270 (1998).
75 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors,§V(C)(1).
76 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 2293, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998) .
77 See Miller v. Kenworth of Dothan, Inc., 277 F.3d 1269, 1278-79 (11th Cir. 2002).
78 Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 330 (2003).
79 EEOC, Guidelines on Discrimination Because of National Origin, 29 C.F.R.§1606.1.
80 110 Cong. Rec. 2549 (1964); H.R. Rep. No. 914, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. 87 (1963).
81 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination, 13-II (A).
82 Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins. Co., 791 F.2d 888 (11th Cir. 1986).
83 See Molerio v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 749 F.2d 815 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
84 See Tenenbaum v. Caldera, 45 Fed. Appx. 416, 418 (6th Cir. 2002) (unpublished), quoted in EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination, 13-III (B) (1).
85 Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 888 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1989).
86 Carino v. University of Oklahoma Board of Regents, 750 F.2d 815 (10th Cir. 1984).
87 See Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 888 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1989).
88 Vasquez v. McAllen Bag & Supply Co., 660 F.2d 686 (5th Cir. 1981).
89 Yniguez v. Mofford, 42 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 1995), vacated as moot, 520 U.S. 43 (1997).
90 Garcia v. Rush-Prebyterian-St. Luke’s Med. Ctr., 660 F.2d 1217, 1222 (7th Cir. 1981).
91 EEOC v. Premier Operator Service, Inc., 113 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (N.D. Tex. 2000).
92 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination 13-V (C).
93 Espinoza v. Farah Mfg. Co., 414 U.S. 86, 94 S.Ct. 334, 38 L.Ed.2d 287 (1973).
94 See Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 122 S. Ct. 1275, 1283-84 (2002).
95该法编入美国法典第8编第1324条及以下。
96 8 U.S.C.§1324 b.
97 42 U.S.C. 2000e (j).
98 United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965), and Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970).
99 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.1.
100 See Maberry v. McKune, 24 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (D. Kan. 1998), and Van Koten v. Family Health Management, Inc., 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 1837 (7th Cir. 1998).
101 Brown v. Pena, 441 F. Supp. 1382 (S.D. Fla. 1977), 589 F.2d 1113 (5th Cir. 1979).
102 42 U.S. 2000e-2 (f).
103 Young v. Southwestern Savings & Loan Ass’n, 509 F.2d 140 (5th Cir. 1975).
104 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.3 (b)(2).
105 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.3 (b)(3).
106 Moore v. KUKA Welding Sys. & Robot Corp., 171 F.3d 1073, 1080 (6th Cir. 1999); See also Logan v. Denny’s, Inc., 259 F.3d 558, 568-69 (6th Cir. 2001).
107 Kocsis v. Multi-Care Management, Inc., 97 F.3d 876, 887 (6th Cir. 1996), quoting in Held v. Gulf Oil Co., 684 F.2d 427, 432 (6th Cir. 1982).
108 Harris v. Forklift Sys., 510 U.S. 17, 23, 126 L.Ed.2d 295, 114 S. Ct. 367 (1993); accord Abeita v. TransAmerica Mailings, Inc., 159 F.3d 246, 251 (6th Cir. 1998); Hafford v. Seidner, 183 F.3d 506, 512 (6th. Cir. 1999).
109 29 C.F.R. 1605.1(a)(2), 31 FR 3870 (1966).
110 29 C.F.R. 1605.1(b)(c), 32 FR 10298.
111 Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63, 97 S. Ct. 2264, 53 L. Ed. 2d 113 (1977).
112 EEOC, Appendix A to§§1605.2 and 1605.3-Background Information, 29 CFR Ch. XIV (7-1-03 Edition), pp.195-196.
113 Brown v. Polk County, Iowa, 61 F.3d 650, 654 (8th Cir. 1995).
114 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.2 (d)(1)(i)(ii)(iii).
115 Ansonia Board of Education v. Philbrook, 479 U.S. 60, 107 S. Ct. 367, 93 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1986).
116 Wilson v. U.S. West Communications, 58 F.3d 1337 (8th Cir. 1995).
117 Bhatia v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 734 F.2d 1382 (9th Cir. 1984).
118 United States v. Board of Education for School District of Philadelphia, 911 F.2d 882 (3d Cir. 1990).
119 McDaniel v. Essex Int’l, Inc., 696 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1982).
120 29 U.S.C.§169.
121 Larson v. Valenta, 456 U.S. 228, 102 U. Ct. 1673, 72 L.Ed.2d 33 (1982).
122 Thornton v. Caldor, 472 U.S. 703, 105 S.Ct. 2914, 86 L.Ed.2d 557 (1985).
123 Corporation of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327, 107 S. Ct. 2862, 97 L.Ed.2d 273 (1987).
124 EEOC v. Townley Engineering & Mfg. Co., 759 F.2d 610 (9th Cir. 1988).
125 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 (e)(2).
126 General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125, 97 S. Ct. 401, 50 L. Ed. 2d 343 (1976).
127 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed.2d 201 (1998).
128 Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, 442 F.2d 385, 3 FEP 337 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 950 (1971).
129 Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702, 98 S.Ct. 1370, 55 L.Ed.2d 657 (1978).
130 Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, 463 U.S. 1073, 103 S.Ct. 3492, 77 L.Ed.2d 1236 (1983).
131 Phillips v. Martin Marietta, 400 U.S. 542, 3 FEP 40 (1971).
132 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R. 1604.4.
133 Sprogis v. United Air Lines, 444 F.2d 1194, 3 FEP 621 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 991, 4 FEP 37 (1971).
134 General Electric Co. v. Gilbert et al, 429 U.S. 125, 97 S.Ct. 401, 50 L.Ed.2d 343 (1976).
135 42 U.S.C.§2000e (k).
136 International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L. Ed. 2d 158 (1991).
137 See Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, 434 U.S. 136, 98 S. Ct. 347, 54 L. Ed. 2d 356 (1977); Compare Abraham v. Graphic Arts Int’l Union, 660 F. 2d 811 (D. C. Cir. 1981).
138 Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. EEOC, 462 U.S. 669, 103 S. Ct. 2622, 77 L. Ed. 2d 89 (1983).
139 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604. 11 (a).
140 Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 64-67, (1986).
141 Reichman v. Bureau of Affirmative Action, 536 F. Supp. 1149 (M. D. Pa. 1982).
142 DeCintio v. Westchester County Med. Cent., 807 F. 2d 304 (2d Cir. 1986).
143 Simmons v. Lyons, 746 F. 2d 265 (5th Cir. 1984).
144 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed. 2d 201 (1998).
145 Nichols v. Azteca Restaurant Enterprises, 256 F. 3d 864 (9th Cir. 2001).
146 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604.11 (d).
147 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998); Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998).
148 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604.11 (e).
149 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 109 S.Ct. 1775, 104 L.Ed 2d 268 (1989).
150 DeSantis v. Pacific Tel. & Co., 608 F. 2d 327 (9th Cir. 1979); Sommers v. Budget Mkt., Inc., 667 F. 2d 748 (8th Cir. 1982).
151 Thompson v. Sawyer, 678 F. 2d 257 (D.C. Cir. 1982); 29 C.F.R.§1620.14 (1987).
152 Hein v. Oregon College of Educ., 718 F. 2d 910 (9th Cir. 1983).
153 D’Alema v. Appalachian Communities, 55 FEP (BNA) 1426, 1428 (N.D. Ga. 1991); see 29 C.F.R.§1620.9 (b).
154 29 U.S.C.§213 (a).
155 See 29 U.S.C. 621.
156 29 U.S.C. 623 (a).
157 See 29 U.S.C. 623 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e) and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2.
158 Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, 427 U.S. 307 (1976), see also Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93 (1979).
159 See Hazen Paper Company v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604, 113 S.Ct. 1701, 123 L.Ed.2d 338 (1993).
160 County of Washington, Ore. v. Gunther, 452 U.S. 161, 170-71, 68 L.Ed.2d 751, 101 S.Ct. 2242 (1981).
161 See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 732-34 (3d Cir. 1995); EEOC v. Francis W. Parker School, 41 F.3d 1073, 1076-77 (7th Cir. 1994); Lyon v. Ohio Educ. Ass’n & Professional Staff Union, 53 F.3d 135, 138-39 (6th Cir. 1995).
162 Ellis v. United Airlines, Inc., 73 F.3d 999 (10th Cir. 1996).
163 Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio v. Betts, 492 U.S. 158, 109 S.Ct. 2854, 106 L.Ed.2d 134 (1989).
164 EEOC, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 C.F.R.§1625.10 (b).
165 Professional Pilots Federation v. Federal Aviation Administration, 118 F.3d 758 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
166 See 29 U.S.C.§623(j).
167 29 U.S.C.§623 (f)(2)(B)(ii).
168 Solon v. Gary Community School Corp., 180 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 1999).
169 29 U.S.C.§626 (f)(1).
170 EEOC, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 C.F.R.§1625.22 (a)(3).
171 Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc., 522 U.S. 422, 118 S.Ct. 838, 139 L.Ed. 849 (1998).
172 See Findings and Purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.§12101.
173 H.R. Rep. No. 485, 101st Cong., 2d sess., pt. 2. at 32 (1990).
174 42 U.S.C.§12101 (b).
175 42 U.S.C.§12112 (a).
176 See S. Rep. No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 21 (1989); and H.R. Rep. No. 485 part 3, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 27 (1989).
177 EEOC, Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (h).
178 See S. Rep. No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 22-23 (1989); and H.R. Rep. No. 485 part 3, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 28-29 (1989).
179 Amir v. St. Louis University, 184 F.3d 1017 (8th Cir. 1999)
180 Pack v. Kmart Corp., 166 F.3d 1399 (10th Cir. 1999).
181 Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 118 S.Ct. 2196, 141 L.Ed.2d 540 (1998).
182 Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002).
183 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (j).
184 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (j)(3).
185 Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 517 U.S. 471, 491, 144 L.Ed.2d 450, 119 S.Ct. 2139 (1999).
186 Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002).
187 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (l).
188 School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 107 S.Ct. 1123, 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987).该案是根据康复法作出的判决,但该案的判决意见仍然适用于根据《残疾美国人法》提起的诉讼。
189 EEOC, Appendix to Part 1630-Interpretive Guidance on Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 CFR Ch. XIV (7-1-03 Edition), p.354.
190 Cook v. Rhode Island Department of Mental Health, Retardation, & Hosps., 10 F.3d 17, 23-24 (1st Cir. 1993).
191 42 U.S.C.§12211 (a)(b).
192 42 U.S.C.§12111(8).
193 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (n)(2)(3).
194 Borkowski v. Valley Central School District, 63 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 1995).
195 29 C.F.R.§1630.4.
196 42 U.S.C.§12112 (b).
197 See Koshinski v. Decatur Foundry, Inc., 177 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 1999), and Mantolete v. Bolger, 767 F.2d 1416 (9th Cir. 1985).
198 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (r).
199 Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 118 S.Ct. 2196, 141 L.Ed.2d 540 (1998).
200 School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 107 S.Ct. 1123, 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987).
201 Chalk v. United States District Court, 840 F.2d 701 (9th Cir. 1988).
202 Estate of Mauro v. Borgess Med. Ctr., 137 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 1998).
203 Wood v. Omaha School District, 25 F.3d 667, 669 (8th Cir. 1994).
204 Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, 119 S.Ct. 2162 (1999).
205 Hamlin v. Charter Township of Flint, 165 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 1999).
206 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Preemployment Disability-Related Questions and Medical Examination Under
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 8 FEP Manual (BNA) 405: 7197 (1995).
207 See Executive Order No. 13145, To Prohibit Discrimination in Federal Employment Based on Genetic Information, 65 Fed. Reg. 6877 (Feb. 8, 2000).
208 See Smith v. Chrysler Corp., 155 F.3d 799 (6th Cir. 1998).
209 See Griffin v. Steeltek Inc., 160 F.3d 591 (10th Cir. 1998); and Fredenburg v. Contra Costa County Department of Health Services, 172 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 1999).
210 42 U.S.C.§12112 (d) (3).
211 See Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Lab., 135 F.3d 1260 (9th Cir. 1998).
212 42 U.S.C.§12112 (d) (4).
213 Deckert v. City of Ulysses, No. 93-1295-PFK, 1995 WL 580074 (D. Kan. Sept. 6, 1995).
214 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Job-Related and Consistent with Business Necessity, 7/27/2000.
215 EEOC Enforcement Guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act and Psychiatric Disabilities, 8 FEP Manual (BNA) 405: 7469 (1997).
216 42 U.S.C.§12112 (b) (5).
217 Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (o).
218 Schmidt v. Safeway Inc., 864 F. Supp. 991, 996-97, 3 AD Cas. (BNA) 1141, 1145-46 (D.Or. 1994).
219 Criado v. IBM, 145 F.3d 437, 444-45, 8 AD Cas. (BNA) 336, 341 (1st Cir. 1998).
220 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 1521 (2002).
221 Haysman v. Food Lion, Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1092, 1104, 4 AD Cas. (BNA) 1297, 1305 (S.D. Ga. 1995).
222 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 1523 (2002).
223 Hendricks-Robinson v. Excel Corp., 154 F.3d 685, 8 AD Cas. (BNA) 875, 882 (7th Cir. 1998).
224 Templeton v. Neodata Servs., Inc., No. 98-1106, 1998 WL 852516 (10th Cir. Dec. 10, 1998); and Beck v. University of Wis. Bd. of Regents, 75 F.3d 1130, 1134, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 304, 307 (7th Cir. 1996).
225 Stewart v. Happy Herman’s Cheshire Bridge, Inc., 117 F.3d 1278, 1285-86, 6 AD Cas. (BNA) 1834, 1839 (11th Cir. 1997).
226 Hankins v. The Gap, Inc., 84 F.3d 797, 801, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 924, 927 (6th Cir. 1996).
227 42 U.S.C.§12111 (10).
228 Stone v. Mount Vernon, 118 F.3d 92, 101, 6 AD Cas. (BNA) 1685, 1693 (2d Cir. 1997).
229 Senate Report No. 101-116, at 36 (1989).
230 See, e.g., Monette v. Electronic Data Sys. Corp., 90 F.3d 1173, 1184 n.10, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 1326, 1335 n.10 (6th Cir. 1996); Vande Zande v. Wisconsin Department of Admin., 44 F.3d 538, 543, 3 AD Cas. (BNA) 1636, 1638-39 (7th Cir. 1995).
231 See Cong. Rec. H2475 (1990).
232 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, (2002).
233 Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604 (1993).
234 Earley v. Champion Int’l Corp., 907 F.2d 1077, 1081 (11th Cir. 1990).
235 Slack v. Havens, 7 FEP 885 (S.D. Cal. 1973), affirmed as modified, 522 F.2d 1091 (9th Cir. 1975).
236 Suggs v. ServiceMaster Education Food Management, 72 F.3d 1228, 1231 (6th Cir. 1996).
237 Boutros v Canton Regional Transit Auth., 997 F.2d 198, 201 (6th Cir. 1993).
238 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).
239第703(a)(1)条规定雇主不得因为种族而歧视雇员或职位申请人;第704(a)条规定雇主因为某人参与了受到该法保护的活动而对该人进行报复,也属于歧视行为。
240 Lynn v. Deaconess Med. Center, 160 F.3d 484 (8th Cir. 1998).
241 William v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 85 F.3d 270 (7th Cir. 1996).
242 Enowmbitang v. Seagate Tech., 148 F.3d 973 (8th Cir. 1998).
243 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981).
244 See Loeb v. Textron, Inc., 600 F.2d 1003, 1011-1012, n. 5 (C.A.1 1979).
245 See EEOC v. Associated Dry Goods Corp., 449 U.S. 590, 101 S.Ct. 817, 66 L.Ed.2d 762 (1981).
246 St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993).
247 Fisher v. Vassar College, 114 F.3d 1332 (2d Cir. 1997).
248 See Beaird v. Seagate Technology, Inc., 145 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 1998); Shaw v. HCA Health Servs. Of Midwest, Inc., 79 F.3d 99 (8th Cir. 1996); Barbour v. Merrill, 58 F.3d 1270 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
249 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 109 S.Ct. 1775, 104 L.Ed.2d 268 (1989).
250 See Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1989); Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc., 490 U.S. 900 (1989); Martin v. Wilks, 490 U.S. 755 (1989); Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989).
251 Tyler v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 958 F.2d 1176 (2d Cir. 1992).
252 Desert Palace v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90 (2003).
253指42 U.S.C.§2000e (m)对证实(demonstrates)的定义:用语“证实(demonstrates)”指完成举证责任和说服责任。
254 Los Angeles Department of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702 (1978).
255 110 Cong. Rec. 14270 (1964).
256 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977).
257 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396, 360, n46, (1977).
258 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 805, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).
259 Hazelwood School District v. United States, 433 U.S. 299 (1977).
260 See EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 839 F.2d 302 (7th Cir. 1988).
261 See, e.g., Smith v. Virginia Commonwealth University, 84 F.3d 622 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc); Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385, 106 S.Ct. 3000, 92 L.Ed.2d 315 (1986).
262 EEOC, Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.4.D.
263 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 417-418, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
264 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (e) (1).
265 See, e.g. Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 332-37 (1977); Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 122-25 (1985).
266 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al. v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L.Ed 2d 158 (1991).
267 Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 442 F.2d 385 (5th Cir. 1971), and Western Air Lines, Inc. v. Criswell,
472 U.S. 400, 105 S.Ct. 2743, 86 L.Ed.2d 321 (1985).
268 Weeks v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 408 F.2d 228 (th Cir. 1969), and Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
269 City of Los Angeles v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 720, 709 (1978).
270 Rosenfeld v. Southern Pac. Co., 444 F.2d 1219 (9th Cir. 1971).
271 Hardin v. Stynchcomb, 691 F.2d 1364 (11th Cir. 1982); Wright v. Olin Corp., 697 F.2d 1172 (4th Cir. 1982).
272 See Lust v. Sealy, Inc., 383 F.3d 580, 583 (7th Cir. 2004), and Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free School District, 365 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2004).
273 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R.§1604.2 (a)(1).
274 Kern v. Dynalectron Corp., 577 F.Supp. 1196 (N.D. Tex. 1983), affirmed 746 F.2d 810 (1984).
275 Pime v. Loyola University of Chicago, 803 F.2d 351 (7th Cir. 1986).
276 110 Cong. Rec. 2549.
277 Rosenfeld v. Southern Pac. Co., 444 F.2d 1219 (9th Cir. 1971).
278 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R.§1604.2 (b)(1).
279 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al. v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L.Ed 2d 158 (1991).
280 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (h).
281 Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, 434 U.S. 136 (1977).
282 California Brewers Association v. Bryant, 444 U.S. 598, 100 S.Ct. 814, 63 F.Ed.2d 55 (1980).
283 James v. Stockham Valves & Fittings Co., 559 F.2d 310 (5th Cir. 1977).
284 Quarles v. Philip Morris, 279 F.Supp. 505 (E.D. Va. 1968).
285 See International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d (1977); United Airlines, Inc. v. Evans, 431 U.S. 553, 97 S.Ct. 1885, 52 L.Ed.2d 571 (1977).
286 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d (1977).
287 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (k).
288 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 91 S.Ct. 849, 28 L.Ed.2d 158 (1971).
289 EEOC Guidelines on Employment Testing Procedures, issued August 24, 1966.
290 See, e.g., United States v. City of Chicago, 400 U.S. 8, 91 S.Ct. 18, 27 L.Ed.2d 9 (1970).
291 Gaston County v. United States, 395 U.S. 285, 89 S.Ct. 1720, 23 L.Ed.2d 309 (1969).
292 EEOC v. Warshawsky & Co., 867 F.Supp. 647 (N.D. I11. 1991).
293 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 335, n.15 (1977).
294 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
295 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 335, n.15 (1977).
296 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254-256 (1981).
297 Wards Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 109 S.Ct. 2115, 104 L.Ed.2d 733 (1989).
298 The Civil Rights Act of 1991,§2 (2), 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
299 The Civil Rights Act of 1991,§3 (2), 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
300 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
301 Chavez v. Coors Brewing Co., 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 5300 (10th Cir. 1999).
302 Fudge v. City of Providence Fire Department, 766 F.2d 650 (1st Cir. 1985).
303 Hazelwood School District v. United States, 433 U.S. 299, 97 S.Ct. 2736, 53 L.Ed.2d 768 (1977).
304 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
305 Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
306 EEOC, The Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, 29 C.F.R.§1607.4D (1993).
307 EEOC v. Joint Apprenticeship Comm., 164 F.3d 89 (2d Cir. 1998).
308 See, e.g., United States v. City of Warren, 138 F.3d 1083 (10th Cir. 1998), and Newark Branch, NAACP v. City of Bayonne, 134 F.3d 113 (3d Cir. 1998).
309 EEOC v. Chicago Miniature Lamp Works, 947 F.2d 292 (7th Cir. 1991).
310 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
311 Fitzpatrick v. City of Atlanta, 2 F.3d 1112 (11th Cir. 1993).
312 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
313 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
314 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. at 431.
315 See, e.g., Local 189, United Papermakers & Papermakers v. United States, 416 F.2d 980, 995 (5th Cir. 1969, cert. denied, 397 U.S. 919 (1970).
316 See, e.g., United States v. N. L. Indus., Inc., 479 F.2d 354, 365-66 (8th Cir. 1973).
317 See, e.g., Townsend v. Nassau County Medical Center, 558 F.2d 117, 120 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1015 (1978).
318 See, e.g., United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 446 F.2d 652, 662 (2d Cir. 1971); Robinson v. Lorillard Corp., 444 F.2d 791, 798 (4th Cir.), cert. dismissed under Rule 60, 404 U.S. 1006 (1971).
319 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 432 (1971).
320 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971); Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975); Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977); New York Transit Authority v. Beazer, 440 U.S. 568 (1979); and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977 (1988).
321 Lanning v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 181 F.3d 478 (3d Cir. 1999).
322 Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
323 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
324 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
325 See Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440, 102 S.Ct. 2525, 73 L.Ed.2d 130 (1982).
326 42 U.S.C.§2000-e (h).
327 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
328 Uniform Guidelines of Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.16W.
329 Uniform Guidelines of Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.6A-C.
330 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975); and Watkins v. Scott Paper Co., 530 F.2d 1159 (5th Cir. 1976).
331 Boston Chapter, NAACP, Inc. v. Beecher, 504 F.2d 1017 (1st Cir. 1974).
332 United States v. Chicago, 549 F.2d 415 (7th Cir. 1977), on remand 437 F.Supp. 256 (N.D. Ill. 1977), judgment affirmed 567 F.2d 730 (7th Cir. 1977).
333 Guardians Association of New York City Police Department, Inc. v. Civil Service Commission of New York,
630 F.2d 79 (2d Cir. 1980); Gilbert v. Little Rock, Ark., 722 F.2d 1390 (8th Cir. 1983); 29 C.F.R.§1607.5H.
334 William v. Ford Motor Co., 187 F.3d 533 (6th Cir. 1999).
335 See, e.g., Rowe v. General Motors Corp., 457 F.2d 348 (5th Cir. 1972); Brown v. Gaston County Dyeing Mach. Co., 457 F.2d 1377 (4th Cir. 1972).
336 See, e.g. Scott v. Parkview Memorial Hospital, 175 F.3d 523 (7th Cir. 1999); Ezold v. Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, 983 F.2d 509 (3d Cir. 1992).
337 See, e.g., Stallworth v. Shuler, 777 F.2d 1431 (11th Cir. 1985).
338 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.1 (c).
339 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (j).
340 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (g).
341 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.1 (c).
342 See EEOC, et al., Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978).
343 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.3.
344 United Steelworker of America, AFL-CIO-CLC, v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 61 L.Ed.2d 480 (1979).
345 Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
346 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.4.
347 See, the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council“Policy Statement on Affirmative Action Programs for State and Local Government Agencies”, 41 FR 38814 (September 13, 1976), reaffirmed and extended to all persons subject to Federal equal employment opportunity laws and orders, in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978) 43 FR 38290; 38300 (Aug. 25, 1978).
348 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.4 (c) (2).
349 42 U.S.C.§2000e-12 (b) (1).
350 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.2.
351也有人认为联邦最高法院解读的《1964年民权法》第七章的立法目的是缺乏根据的。See, George Schatzki, United Steelworkers of America v. Weber: An Exercise in Understandable Indecision, Washington Law Review, Vol. 56, (1980), pp.66-67.
352 Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987), n.8.
353 W.R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 79, Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757, 103 S.Ct. 2177, 76 L.Ed.2d 298 (1983).
354 See Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
355 Id.
356 United States v. Board of Education of the Township of Piscataway, 91 F.3d 1547 (3d Cir. 1996) (en banc).
357 Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, 476 U.S. 267, 106 S.Ct. 1842, 90 L.Ed.2d 260 (1986); and Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
358 United States v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 8 FEP 1089, 1106 (E.D. La. 1974).
359 41 C.F.R.§60-1.40 (a) and (b).
360 41 C.F.R.§60-2.11 (b) (1).
361 41 C.F.R.§60-4.4 to 4.6.
362 41 C.F.R.§60-2.12 (e).
363 Legal Aid Society of Alameda County v. Brennan, 608 F.2d 1319 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 921, 100 S.Ct. 3010, 65 L.Ed.2d 1112 (1980).
364 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (n).
365 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977).
366 Local 28, Sheet Metal Workers v. EEOC, 478 U.S. 421, 106 S.Ct. 3019, 92 L.Ed.2d 344 (1986).
367 United States v. Paradise, 480 U.S. 149, 107 S.Ct. 1053, 94 L.Ed.2d 203 (1987).
368 See Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Federico Pena, et al., 515 U.S. 200, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995).
369 Metro Broadcasting v. FCC, 497 U.S. 547, 110 S.Ct. 2997, 111 L.Ed.2d 445 (1990).
370 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Federico Pena, et al., 515 U.S. 200, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995).
371 Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989).
372 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 965 F.Supp. 1556, 1576-1577 (D. Colo. 1997).
373 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
374 EEOC, Procedural Regulations, 29 C.F.R. Part 1601 (2007); EEOC, Procedures for Coordinating the Investigation of Complaints or Charges of Employment Discrimination Based on Disability Subject to the Americans With Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Action of 1973, 29 C.F.R. Part 1640 (2007).
375 Waiters v. Robert Bosch Co., 683 F.2d 89, 92 (4th Cir. 1982).
376 Weeks v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 408 F.2d 228 (5th Cir. 1969).
377 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (c).
378 Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250 (1980).
379 Wolfolk v. Rivera, 729 F.2d 1114, 1117 (7th Cir. 1984).
380 Reeb v. Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc., 516 F.2d 924 (5th Cir. 1975).
381 See Tucker v. United Parcel Serv., 657 F.2d 724 (5th Cir, 1981); Contra Hamilton v. 1st Source Bank, 895 F.2d 159 (4th Cir. 1990).
382 See Scheerer v. Rose State College, 950 F.2d 661 (10th Cir. 1991); Pearson v. Macon-Bibb County Hospital Authority, 952 F.2d 1274 (11th Cir. 1992).
383 Sabree v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters, Local 33, 921 F.2d 396 (1st Cir. 1990).
384 Lorance v. AT & T Technologies, 490 U.S. 900, 109 S.Ct. 2261, 104 L.Ed.2d 961 (1989).
385 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (e) (2).
386 Philbin v. General Elec. Capital Auto Lease, Inc., 929 F.2d 321 (7th Cir. 1991).
387 Contra Shempert v. Harwick Chemical Co., 151 F.3d 793 (8th Cir. 1998).
388 29 U.S.C.§161 (2).
389 Crowley v. Prince George’s County, Maryland, 890 F.2d 683 (4th Cir. 1989).
390 Northeastern Florida Chapter of Assoc. Gen. Contractors v. City of Jacksonville, Florida, 508 U.S. 656 (1993).
391 Calloway v. National Health Plans, 986 F.2d 446 (11th Cir. 1993); Allen v. United States Steel Corp., 665 F.2d
689 (5th Cir. 1982).
392 Greenwood v. Ross, 778 F.2d 448 (8th Cir. 1985).
393 Terrell v. United States Pipe & Foundry Co., 644 F.2d 1112 (5th Cir. 1981).
394 Sanchez v. Standard Brands, Inc., 431 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1970).
395 Occidental Life Ins. Co. v. EEOC, 432 U.S. 355 (1977).
396 See EEOC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 668 F.2d 1199 (11th Cir. 1982).
397 29 U.S.C.§626 (b).
398 See United States v. Burke, 504 U.S. 229 (1992).
399 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
400 McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co., 427 U.S. 273, 96 S.Ct. 2574, 49 L.Ed.2d 493 (1976).
401 Saunders v. Claytor, 629 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1980).
402 Brown v. East Miss. Elec. Power Assn., 989 F.2d 858, 863 (5th Cir. 1993).
403 See Goss v. Exxon Office Systems Co., 747 F.2d 885 (3d Cir. 1984).
404 Patterson v. American Tobacco Co., 535 F.2d 257 (4th Cir. 1976).
405 42 U.S.C.§1981, and see Johnson v. Railroad Express Agency, 421 U.S. 454 (1975).
406 Turic v. Holland Hospitality, Inc., 85 F.3d 1211 (6th Cir. 1996).
407 42 U.S.C.§1981a (b) (1).
408 Romasanta v. United Air Lines, Inc., 717 F.2d 1140 (7th Cir. 1983).
409 Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 111, 114 (1992).
410 Love v. Mayor of Cheyenne, 620 F.2d 235 (10th Cir. 1980).
411 New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. Carey, 447 U.S. 54 (1980).
412 Walker v. NationsBank of Florida, N.A. 53 F.3d 1548 (11th Cir. 1995).
413 Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412, 98 S.Ct. 694, 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978).
414 The Civil Rights Act of 1991, Section 118, 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
415 9 U.S.C.§1.
416 Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974).
417 Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991).
418 Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp., 525 U.S. 70, 119 S.Ct. 391, 142 L.Ed.2d 361 (1998).
419 9 U.S.C.§10 (a).
420 Halligan v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., 148 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 1998).
[1] [美]卢瑟·S·路德克主编.王波等译.美国的社会与文化:构建美国[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.273.
[2] [英]J·R·波尔著.张聚国译.美国平等的历程[M].北京:商务印书馆,2007.35.
[3] [美]路易斯·梅南德著.肖凡,鲁帆译.美国观念的故事:哲学俱乐部[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.7.
[4] [美]J·布卢姆等著.杨国标,张儒林译.美国的历程(上)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1988.531-536.
[5] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 366-367.
[6] Hale, Rights Under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment Against Injuries Inflicted by Private Individuals[J], 6 Lawyer Guild Review, 627(1946).
[7] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 371-372.
[8] [美]阿奇博尔德·考克斯著.田雷译.法院与宪法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.266-267.
[9] [美]霍维茨著.信春鹰,张志铭译.沃伦法院对正义的追求[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.46.
[10] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 392-393.
[11] Wayne A. Santoro, The Civil Rights Movement’s Struggle for Fair Employment: A“Dramatic Event-Conventional Politics”Model[J], Social Forces, Vol. 81, No. 1. (Sep., 2002), p. 179.
[12] Wayne A. Santoro, The Civil Rights Movement’s Struggle for Fair Employment: A“Dramatic Event-Conventional Politics”Model, Social Forces, Vol. 81, No. 1. (Sep., 2002), p. 186.
[13] [法]法兰斯瓦·戴丰泰特著.王若璧译.种族歧视[M].台北:远流出版公司,1990.
[14] Robert Bork, Civil Rights: A Challenge[J], The New Republic, Aug. 31, 1963, p. 22.
[15] Paula England, Neoclassical Economists’Theories of Discrimination[A], in edited by PaulBurstein, Equal Employment Opportunity: Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Aldine de Gruyter, 1994, p. 59.
[16] Gray Becker, The Economics of Discrimination[M], 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957.
[17] Kenneth Arrow, Models of Job Discrimination[A], pp. 83-102 in Racial Discrimination in Economics Life[C], edited by A. Pascal. Lexington, MA: Lexington, Heath.
[18] Janice F. Madden, The Economics of Sex Discrimination, Lexington, MA: Lexington 1973.
[19] John J. Donohue III, Is Title VII Efficient?[J] The University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 134, (1986), pp. 1411-1431.
[20] [美]凯斯·R·孙斯坦著.金朝武,胡爱平,乔聪启译.自由市场与社会正义[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.201-223.
[21] Vaas, Title VII: Legislative History[J], 7 Bost. C. Ind. & Comm. L. Rev. 431, 441 (1966).
[22] Michael J. Zimmer, and Others, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, New York, 2000, p.739.
[23] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 121.
[24] Krauskopf, Employment Discharge: Survey and Critique of the Modern Employment at Will Rule[J], 51 U.M.K.C.L. Rev. 189, 215(1983).
[25] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 625.
[26] (台)郑丽娇.美国「平等就业机会委员会」推行两性工作平等政策成效之评估研究[A].载焦兴铠主编.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美研究所”,1996.246-247.
[27] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.冯克利.至上的美德:平等的理论与实践[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003.1.
[28] [英]戴维·米勒等.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1992. 204.
[29] Black’s Law Dictionary[Z], 6th ed. p. 467.
[30]国际人权法教程项目组.国际人权法教程[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002. 398.
[31] [美]约翰·罗尔斯.姚大志译.作为公平的正义——正义新论[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002. 70.
[32] Deborah J. Lockton, Employment Law[M], Fourth Edition, Palgrave MacMillan 2003, pp.125-135.
[33] [英]凯瑟琳·巴纳德著.付欣译.欧盟劳动法[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2005. 225.
[34] Alfred W. Blumrosen, Strangers in Paradise: Griggs v. Duke Co. and the Concept of Employment Discrimination[A], in edited by Paul Burstein: Equal Employment Opportunity:Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York, 1994, pp. 109-110.
[35] Barbara Lindemann Schlei, Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law[M], The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1976.
[36] Michael J. Zimmer, et al., Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000.
[37] Samuel Estreicher, et al., Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000.
[38] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p. 1580.
[39] (台)焦兴铠.对我国就业歧视问题之探讨[A].劳工法论丛(一)[C].台北:元照出版公司,2000.552,转引自:喻术红.反就业歧视法律问题之比较研究[J].中国法学,2005(1).131.
[40] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p. 1647-1648.
[41] James E. Holloway, A Primer on Employment Policy for Contingent Work: Less Employment Regulation Through Fewer Employer-Employee Relations[J], 20 T. Marshall L. Rev. 27, 33-35. (1994).
[42] U.S. Departments. of Labor & Commerce, Report and Recommendations of the Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations[R], pp38-39.
[43] R.Blanpain & C.Engels (ed.), Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations in Industrialized Market Economies[C], Kluwer Law International, 2001, pp. 369-370.
[44] Morris B. Abram, Affirmative Action: Fair Shakers and Social Engineers[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 99, 1986, p. 1312.
[45] Samuel Estreicher, Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, p. 45.
[46] Herbert Hill, Black Labor and the American Legal System: Race, Work, and the Law[A], in edited by Paul Burstein, Equal Employment Opportunity: Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Aldine de Gruyter, 1994, p.8.
[47] Id, pp.9-11.
[48] Council of Economic Advisors, Changing America: Indicators of Social Well-Being by Race and Hispanic Origin[R], 1998, pp.33-39.
[49] EEOC Charge Statistic, at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/charges.html.
[50] Office of Management and Budget, Provisional Guidance on the Implementation of the1997 Standard for Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity 6-7 (12/15/00).
[51] United States Census Bureau, Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 2000, at 9 (2001), http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-206.pdf.
[52] Immigrant Labor Force in U.S. Up Sharply, Chicago Tribune, Sept. 4, 2000, available at 2000 WL 3704780.
[53] Pyong Gap Min, Ethnicity: Concepts, Theories, and Trends, in Struggle for Ethnic Identity: Narratives by Asian American Professionals[A], pp16, 18 (Pyong Gap Min & Rose Kim eds., 1999).
[54] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p.232.
[55] U.S. Census Bureau, Age by Language Spoken at Home by Ability to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over: Census 2000[R], http://factfinder.census.gov/ servlet/DTTable?ds_name=D&geo_id=D&mt_name=ACS_C2SS_EST_G2000_P035&_lang=en.
[56] Mari J. Matsuda, Voices of America: Accent, Antidiscrimination Law, and a Jurisprudence for the Last Reconstruction[J], 100 Yale Law Journal 1329, 1384-85 (1991).
[57] U.S. Department of Commerce, 1960, Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population; Vol. I[R].
[58] U.S. Department of Commerce, 1993, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1993[R], Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Census, p. 426.
[59] Samuel Estreicher, Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, p.420.
[60] Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (1976)[Z], p1062.
[61] (台)焦兴铠.美国两性工作平等制度之研究[A].载焦兴铠主编.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美所”,1996.95-96.
[62] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 249.
[63] Bennett Capers, Sex(ual Orientation) and Title VII[J], Columbia Law Review, Vol. 91, (1991), pp. 1158-1166.
[64] Jeffrey S. Byrne, Affirmative Action for Lesbians and Gay Men: A Proposal for True Equality of Opportunity and Workforce Diversity[J], 11 Yale Law and Poly. Review, 47, 63 (1993).
[65] George Rutherglen, From Race to Age: The Expanding Scope of Employment Discrimination Law[J], The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2. (Jun., 1995), pp.491-521.
[66] John J. Donohue III & Peter Siegelman, The Changing Nature of EmploymentDiscrimination Litigation[J], 43 Stanford Law Review 983 (1991).
[67] Michael J. Zimmer et al., Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business 2000, p.720.
[68] National Research Council, Ending Mandatory Retirement For Tenured Faculty: The Consequences for Higher Education[M], (P.B. Hammond & H.P. Morgan eds. 1991).
[69] Michael C. Harper, Age-Based Exit Incentives, Coercion, and the Prospective Waiver of ADEA Rights: The Failure of the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act[J], 79 Va. L. Rev. 1271 (1993).
[70] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedures to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy (Fall, 2001),p.151.
[71] Michael D. Moberly, Letting Katz out of the Bag: The Employer’s Duty to Accommodate Perceived Disabilities[J], Arizona State Law Journal, Vol. 30, Fall, 1998, p. 608.
[72] Jean Ruth Schroedel, Employer Attitude Towards Hiring Persons with Disabilities, 1978, quoting in Samuel Estreicher & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, pp.515-16.
[73] Deborah Kaplan, Employment Rights: History, Trends and Status, in Law Reform in Disability Rights[R], Vol. 2 (Berkeley: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, 1981), p. E-4.
[74] Steven F. Stuhlbarg, Comment,“Reasonable Accommodation Under the Americans with Disabilities: How March Must One Do Before Hardship Turns Undue?”[J], University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 59, (1991), p.1311.
[75] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109 (May, 1996), p.1610.
[76] Gregory Scolieri & Matthew H. Woodard, A Call for Clarification: Achieving A Uniform Proof Structure in Reasonable Accommodation Cases Under the Americans with Disabilities Act[J], Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal, Vol.20, No. (Fall, 2002).pp.146-147.
[77] Development in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p.1608.
[78] Gregory Scolieri & Matthew H. Woodard, A Call for Clarification: Achieving A Uniform Proof Structure in Reasonable Accommodation Cases Under the Americans with Disabilities Act[J], Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal, Vol.20, (Fall, 2002).pp.117-152.
[79] Linda Hamilton Krieger, The Content of Our Categories: A Cognitive Bias Approach to Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity[J], Stanford Law Review, Vol. 47, No. 6. (July, 1995), pp.1187-1188.
[80] Nadine Taub, Keeping Women in Their Place: Stereotyping Per Se as a Form of Discrimination[J], Boston College Law Review, Vol. 21, (1980), pp.353-354.
[81] Rebecca Hanner White, De Minimis Discrimination[J], Emory Law Journal, Vol. 47, (1998), pp.1148-1151. See also Ernest F. Lidge III, The Meaning of Discrimination: Why Courts Have Erred in Requiring Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs to Prove that the Employer’s Action Was Materially Adverse or Ultimate[J], 47 Kansas Law Review, 333 (1999); Theresa M. Beiner, Do Reindeer Games Count as Terms, Conditions or Privileges of Employment Under Title VII?[J], 37 Boston College Law Review, 643 (1996).
[82] Kevin W. Williams, The Reasonable Accommodation Difference: The Effect of Applying the Burden Shifting Frameworks Developed Under Title VII in Disparate Treatment Cases to Claims Brought Under Title I of the Americans with Discrimination Act[J], Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, Vol. 18, (1997), pp.103-104.
[83] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (1996), pp.1589-1590.
[84] Jason Long, Advocating“Pretext Plus”: The Impact of Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. on the Shifting Evidentiary Burden Framework[J], 51 Kansas Law Review, 629 (2003).
[85] William R. Corbett, The“Fall”of Summers, The Rise of“Pretext-Plus”, and the Escalating Subordination of Federal Employment Discrimination Law to Employer at Will: Lessons from McKennon and Hicks[J], 30 Georgia Law Review, 305 (Winter, 1996).
[86] Mark S. Brodin, The Demise of Circumstantial Proof in Employment Discrimination Litigation: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, Pretext, and the“Personality”Excuse[J], 18 Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 98, (1997).
[87] David J. Turek, Affirming Ambiguity: Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. and the Burden-Shifting Framework of Disparate Treatment Cases[J], 85 Marquette Law Review, 283 (Fall, 2001).
[88] The Civil Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb., 1993), p.896.
[89] Recent Cases: Employment Law– Discrimination– Ninth Circuit Finds for Employee in a Mixed-Motive Case Without“Direct Evidence”of Discrimination– Costa v. Desert Palace, Inc., 299 F.3d 838 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc), cert. granted, 123 S.Ct. 816 (2003)[J], 116 Harvard Law Review, 1897 (2003).
[90] Michael Abbott, A Swing and a Miss: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Attempt to Resolve the Confusion over the Proper Evidence Burden for Employment Discrimination Litigation inCosta v. Desert Palace[J], Iowa the Journal of Corporation Law, Vol. 30, (2005), pp.573-591.
[91] Brian W. McKay, Mixed Motives Mix-Up: The Ninth Circuit Evades the Direct Evidence Requirement in Disparate Treatment Cases[J], 38 Tulsa Law Review, (2003), pp.503, 505-518.
[92] Kelly Pierce, A Fire Without Smoke: The Elimination of the Direct Evidence Requirement For Mixed-Motive Employment Discrimination Cases in Costa v. Desert Palace[J], 87 Minnesota Law Review, 2173, 2078-2209 (June, 2003).
[93] Ramona L. Paetzold & Steven L. Willborn, The Statistics of Discrimination (1994 & 1998 supp.), pp.29-30, quoting in Samuel Estreicher & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group (2000), p.111.
[94] Douglas Laycock, Statistical Proof and Theories of Discrimination, Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986)[R], p.104.
[95] Kingsley R. Browne, Statistical Proof of Discrimination: Beyond“Damned Lies”[J], 68 Washington Law Review, 477 (1993).
[96] Norris, A Structural Approach to Evaluation of Multiple Regression Analysis as Used to Prove Employment Discrimination: The Plaintiff’s Answer to Defense Attacks of“Missing Factors”and“Pre-Act Discrimination”[J] , Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986), p.65.
[97] Sujata S. Menjoge, Testing the Limits of Anti-discrimination Law: How Employer’Use of Pre-employment Psychological and Personality Tests Can Circumvent Title VII and the ADA[J], 82 North Carolina Law Review, 326, 360 (December, 2003).
[98] Elaine Shoben, Differential Pass-Fail Rates in Employment Testing: Statistical Proof Under Title VII[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 91, 793, 805-811 (1978).
[99] Sumner H. Slichter, James J. Healy & E. Robert Livernash, The Impact of Collective Bargaining on Management[M], (1960), pp.104-106.
[100] George Loewenstein & Nachum Sicherman, Do Workers Prefer Increasing Wage Profiles?[J], Journal of Labor and Economics, 67, 77-80 (1989).
[101] Zimmer, et al, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, pp.474-475.
[102] Mark Brodin, Role of Fault and Motive in Defining Discrimination: The Seniority Question Under Title VII[M], 62 North Carolina Law Review, 943 (1984).
[103] Blumrosen, Strangers in Paradise: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. and the Concept ofEmployment Discrimination[J], 71 Michigan Law Review, 59 (1972).
[104] David Benjamin Oppenheimer, Negligent Discrimination[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 141, No. 3. (Jan. 1993), pp. 899-972.
[105] David Benjamin Oppenheimer, Negligent Discrimination[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 141, No. 3. (Jan. 1993), pp. 899, 927.
[106] Notes, The Civil Rights Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb. 1993), p.896.
[107] John J. Donohue III & Peter Siegelman, The Changing Nature of Employment Discrimination Litigation[J], 43 Stanford Law Review, 983, 998 n.57 (1991).
[108] Michele A. Estrin, Note, Retroactive Application of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to Pending Cases[J], 90 Michigan Law Review, 2035, 2036 n.8 (1992).
[109] Andrew C. Spiropoulos, Defining the Business Necessity Defense to the Disparate Impact Cause of Action: Finding the Golden Mean[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 1479, 1516-1520 (1996).
[110] Julia Lamber, Alternative to Challenge Employee Selection Criteria[J], 1985 Wisconsin Law Review, 1 (1985).
[111] Douglas Laycock, Statistical Proof and Theories of Discrimination[J], Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986), p.99.
[112] George Rutherglen, Disparate Impact under Title VII: An Objective Theory of Discrimination[J], Virginia Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 7. (Oct. 1987), p.1331.
[113] Elaine Shoben, Differential Pass-Fail Rates in Employment Testing: Statistical Proof Under Title VII, 91 Harvard Law Review, 793 (1978). See also Dean Booth & James L. Mackay, Legal Constraints on Employment Testing and Evolving Trends in the Law[J], 29 Emory Law Journal, 121 (1980).
[114] Ramona L. Paetzold & Steven L. Willborn, Deconstructing Disparate Impact: A View of the Model Through New Lenses[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 325, 356 (1995).
[115] Michael J. Zimmer, Individual Disparate Impact Law: On the Plain Meaning of the 1991 Civil Rights Act[J], 30 Loy. U. Chi. L.J 473 (1998).
[116] Business Necessity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: A No-Alternative Approach[J], The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 84, No. 1. (Nov. 1974), p.98.
[117] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.913.
[118] Fiss, A Theory of Fair Employment Laws[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol.38, No.2. (Winter, 1971), p.239.
[119] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.913.
[120] Fiss, A Theory of Fair Employment Laws[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Winter, 1971), pp.235-258.
[121] Id. at 241.
[122] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.916-17.
[123] Andrew C. Spiropoulos, Difining the Business Necessity Defense to the Disparate Impact Cause of Action: Finding the Golden Mean[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 1479, 1485 (1995).
[124] Linda Lye, Comment, Title VII, Tangled Tale: The Erosion and Confusion of Disparate Impact and the Business Necessity Defense[J], 19 Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 315 (1998).
[125] Dean Booth & James L. Mackay, Legal Constraints on Employment Testing and Evolving Trends in the Law[J], 29 Emory Law Journal, 121 (1980).
[126] Patricia Cain Smith & L.M. Kendall, Retranslation of Expectations: An Approach to the Construction of Unambiguous Anchors for Rating Scales[J], 47 Journal of Applied Psychology, 149-155 (1963); and Richard Campbell, Marvin D. Dunnette, Richard D. Arvey & Lowell V. Hellervik, The Development and Evaluation of Behaviorally Based Rating Scales[J], 57 Journal of Applied Psychology, 15-22 (1973).
[127] American Society for Personnel Administration, A Professional and Legal Analysis of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Criteria[R], 163-164 (1981).
[128] Elizabeth Bartholet, Application of Title VII to Jobs in High Places[J], 95 Harvard Law Review, 947, 987-989, (1982).
[129] Sharona Hoffman, Preplacement Examinations and Job-Relatedness: How to Enhance Privacy and Diminish Discrimination in the Workplace[J], 49 Kansas Law Review, 517, 538 (2001).
[130] Harry Wessel, Personality Tests Grow Popular; Increasingly, They Are Being Used in Hiring[N], Seattle Times, Aug. 3, 2002, at G1, available at 2003 WL 3544069.
[131] Kimberli R. Black, Personality Screening in Employment[J], 32 American Business Law Journal, 69 (1994).
[132] Stephen F. Befort, Pre-Employment Screening and Investigation: Navigating Between aRock and a Hard Place[J], 14 Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal, 367-368 (1997).
[133] Susan J. Stabile, The Use of Personality Tests As a Hiring Tool: Is the Benefit Worth the Cost?[J], 4 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 281-282 (2002).
[134] Sujata S. Menjoge,Comment: Testing the Limits of Anti-discrimination Law: How Employers’Use of Pre-employment Psychological and Personality Tests Can Circumvent Title VII and the ADA[J], 82 North Carolina Law Review, 328-329 (2003).
[135] Susan G. Clark, Interviewing Job Applicants: Asking the Right Questions[J], 128 Education Law Report, 939, 941-942 (1998).
[136] Soroka v. Dayton Hudson Corp., 1 Cal. Rptr. 2d 77 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991), rev. dismissed, 862 P. 2d 148 (Cal. 1993).
[137]李薇薇,Lisa Stearns .禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.50-51.
[138] Note, Rethinking Weber: The Business Response to Affirmative Action[J], 102 Harvard Law Review 658 (1989); Anne B. Fisher, Businessmen Like to Hire by the Numbers[J], Fortune (Sept. 16, 1985), at 26.
[139] Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[M], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.103.
[140] Herman Belz, Equality Transformed: A Quarter-Century of Affirmative Action[M]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991, p.15-16.
[141] Lester C. Thurow, The Zero Sum Socity, (1980), pp.188-189, quoting in Zimmer, et al., Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, pp.472-473.
[142] [美]约翰·罗尔斯著.姚大志译.作为公平的正义——正义新论[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002. 70.
[143] Ehrenberg, Ronald, & Robert S. Smith, Modern Labor Economics[M], 4th ed. New York: Harper Collins. 1991. p.534.
[144] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.信春鹰,吴玉章译.认真对待权利[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998. 299-302.
[145] Eric Schnapper, The Varieties of Numerical Remedies[J], 39 Stanford Law Review, 851 (1987).
[146] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), pp.13-14.
[147] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of ItsLegislative Intent by the Supreme Court[J], Akron Law Review, Vol. 29, No. 2. (Winter, 1996), pp.294-295.
[148] Christopher Mellevoid, Patterson v. McLean Credit Union: Denying the Equality of Effect in the Right to Contract[J], 11 Pace Law Review 411, 420-421, (1991).
[149] Van den Hagg, Ernest, Jews and Negroes[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.390.
[150] Christopher McCrudden, Merit Principles[J], Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4. (Winter, 1998), p.547.
[151] Lamont, The Concept of Desert in Distributive Justice[J], Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 174. (1994), pp.45-46.
[152] Christopher McCrudden, Merit Principles[J], Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4. (Winter, 1998), p.543.
[153] Richard Fallon, To Each According to His Ability, From None According to His Race: The Concept of Merit in the Law of Antidiscrimination[J], 60 Boston University Law Review 815, (1980).
[154] Randall Kennedy, Persuasion and Distrust[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.51.
[155] James N. Baron, Organizational Perspectives on Stratification[J], 10 Annual Review of Sociology 37. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review, Inc., 1984.
[156] Paul Burstein, Affirmative Action, Jobs, and American Democracy: What Has Happened to the Quest for Equal Opportunity?[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 26, No. 4. (1992), pp.912-913.
[157] James R. Kluegel, Trends in Whites’Explanation of the Black-White Gap in Socioeconomic Status, 1977-1989[J], 55 American Sociological Review, 1991, p.517.
[158] Linda Hamilton Krieger, Civil Rights Perestroika: Intergroup Relations After Affirmative Action[J], 86 California Law Review, (1998), pp.1331-1332.
[159] Thomas Sowell, Are Quotas Good for Black?[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.419.
[160] Herman Belz, Equality Transformed: A Quarter-Century of Affirmative Action[M]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991, pp.68-109, 207-234.
[161] William A. Gamson, & Andre Modigliani, The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action[J], 3Research in Political Sociology 137. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1987.
[162] Paul Burstein, Discrimination, Jobs and Politics. Chicago[M]: University of Chicago Press, 1985.
[163] Robert R. Alford, & Roger Friedland, Powers of Theory[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985; Robert A. Dahl, A Preface to Democratic Theory[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1956.
[164] Paul Burstein, Affirmative Action, Jobs, and American Democracy: What Has Happened to the Quest for Equal Opportunity?[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 26, No. 4. (1992), p.916.
[165] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.信春鹰,吴玉章译.认真对待权利[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998. 295.
[166] James J. Heckman & Brook S. Payner, Determining the Impact of Federal Antidiscrimination Policy on the Economic Status of Blacks: A Study of South Carolina[J], 79 American Economics Review, 138 (1989).
[167] James E. Jones, Jr., The Origin of Affirmative Action[J], 21 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 395 (1988).
[168] Charles R. Lawrence III, The Id, The Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning With Unconscious Racism[J], 39 Stanford Law Review 317 (1987).
[169] Eric Schnapper, The Varieties of Numerical Remedies[J], Stanford Law Review, Vol. 39, (1987), p.851.
[170] Samuel Estreicher, & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Group, 2000, pp.257-258.
[171] Kathleen Sullivan, Sins of Discrimination: Last Term’s Affirmative Action Cases[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 100, (1986), p.78.
[172] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of Its Legislative Intent by the Supreme Court[A], quoting in Kermit L. Hall, Freedom and Equality: Discrimination and the Supreme Court[C], Garland Publishing, Inc., 2000, p.25. See also, United Steelworkers v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 61 L.Ed.2d 480 (1979).
[173] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), pp.14-15.
[174] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 2000, p.316.
[175] Notes, The Civil Rights Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb., 1993), p.900.
[176] John J. Donohue III, Employment Discrimination Law in Perspective: Three Concepts of Equality[J], Michigan Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 8, Symposium: Visions of Equality: TheFuture of Title VII. (Aug., 1994), pp.2585-2586.
[177] Michael J. Zimmer, Taxman: Affirmative Action Dodges Five Bullets[J], 1 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 229 (1998).
[178] Barbara Lindemann Schlei, & Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law[M], The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1976, pp.740-741.
[179] Carmen G. Slominski & Hazel M. Willacy, Back Pay and Extra-Judicial Proceedings: Is the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs Exceeding Its Authority?[J], 41 Ohio State Law Journal, 401 (1980).
[180] Donald P. Judges, Light Beams and Particle Dreams: Rethinking the Individual vs. Group Rights Paradigm in Affirmative Action[J], 44 Arkansas Law Review, 1007 (1991).
[181] Marshall J. Walthew, Affirmative Action and the Remedial Scope of Title VII: Procedural Answers to Substantive Questions[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 136, No. 2. (Dec., 1987), pp.625-654.
[182] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of Its Legislative Intent by the Supreme Court[A], in Kermit L. Hall ed., Freedom and Equality: Discrimination and the Supreme Court[C], Garland Publishing, Inc., 2000, p.35.
[183] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), p.22.
[184] David Strauss, The Myth of Colorblindness[J], The Supreme Court Review,Vol. 1986. (1986), pp.100-113.
[185] Christine Jolls, Antidiscrimination and Accommodation[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 115, No. 2. (Dec., 2001), pp.697-699.
[186] Note, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Present Operation and Proposals for Improvement[J], 5 Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problem I, (1969), pp.16-17.
[187] Berg, Equal Employment Opportunity Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964[J], 31 Brooklyn Law Review, (1966), pp.64-68. and Vaas, Title VII: Legislative History[J], 7 B.C. Ind. & Com. L. Rev. (1966), p.431.
[188] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[189] Roy L. Brooks, A Roadmap Through Title VII’s Procedural and Remedial Labyrinth[J], 24 Southwestern University Law Review, 511 (1995).
[190] Jim Beall, Note, The Charge-Filing Requirement of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Accrual and Equitable Modification[J], 91 Michigan Law Review, 798 (1993).
[191] Douglas A. Laycock, Continuing Violations, Disparate Impact in Compensation and Other Title VII Issues[J], 49 Law and Contemporary Problems, (Autumn, 1986), pp.58-60.
[192] Laurie M. Stegman, Note, An Administrative Battle of the Forms: The EEOC’s Intake Questionnaire and Charge of Discrimination[J], 91 Michigan Law Review 124 (1992).
[193] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedures to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), p.146.
[194] Matt A. Mayer, The Use of Mediation in Employment Discrimination Cases[J], 1999 Journal of Dispute Resolution, (1999), pp.153-159.
[195] Julie Harders, Too Good To Last?[J], Aba Journal, (April, 2000), p.30.
[196] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[197] Michael R. Triplett, Study Shows High Satisfaction Levels With EEOC’s Voluntary Mediation ProgramProcedure[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA) No. 189, (Sept. 28, 2000), at A-6.
[198] Michael A. Szkodzinski, An Analysis of the EEOC’s Issuance of Early Right-to-Sue Letters: Does It Promote Judicial Efficiency or Encourage Administrative Incompetence?[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 150, No. 2. (Dec., 2001), pp. 689-717.
[199] N. Morrison Torrey, Indirect Discrimination Under Title VII: Expanding Male Standing to Sue for Injuries Received as a Result of Employer Discrimination Against Females[J], 64 Washington Law Review, (1989), p.365.
[200] Jonathan R. Macey & Geoffrey P. Miller, The Plaintiffs’Attorney’s Role in Class Action and Derivative Litigation: Economic Analysis and Recommendations for Reform[J], University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 58, (1991), p.1.
[201] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[202] Michael J. Zimmer, et al, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, p.1011.
[203] Mark S. Kende, Deconstructing Constructive Discharge: The Misapplication of Constructive Discharge Standard in Employment Discrimination Remedies[J], 71 Notre Dame Law Review, 39 (1995).
[204] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law, West Publishing Co., 2000, p.450.
[205] Nancy Montwieler, EEO Case Filings Said "Leveling Off," But Still a Large Share of Caseload[N], Daily Labor. Report. (BNA) No. 58, at A-1 (Mar. 24, 2000).
[206] Employment Bias Cases in Federal Courts Almost Tripled in Previous Decade, DOJ Says[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA) No. 13, at E-5 (Jan. 20, 2000).
[207] Lauren B. Edelman; Howard S. Erlanger; John Lande, Internal Dispute Resolution: The Transformation of Civil Rights in the Workplace[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 27, No. 3. (1993), pp.502-503.
[208] Carrie Menkel-Meadow, Toward Another View of Legal Negotiation: The Structure of Problem-solving[J], 31 UCLA Law Review, (1984), p.754.
[209] David Luban, The Quality of Justice[J], 66 Denver University Law Review, (1989), p.381.
[210] Bush, Robert A. Baruch, Defining Quality in Dispute Resolution: Taxonomies and Anti-Taxonomies of Quality Arguments[J], 66 Denver University Law Review, (1989), p.335.
[211] Peter Adler, Karen Lovaas, & Neal Milner: The Ideologies of Mediation: The Movement’s Own Story[J], 10 Law & Policy, (1988), p.317.
[212] Richard Hofrichter, Neighborhood Justice in Capitalist Society: The Expansion of the Informal State[M], New York: Greenwood Press, 1987, p.132.
[213] Stewart Macaulay, Private Government, in L. Lipson & S. Wheeler, eds., Law and the Social Sciences[M], New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1986.
[214] Patricia A. Gwartney-Gibbs; Denise H. Lach, Gender and Workplace Resolution: A Conceptual and Theoretical Model[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 28, No. 2. (1994), pp.265-296.
[215] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[216] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.144-145.
[217] Lauren B. Edelman, Stephen Petterson, Elizabeth Chambliss, & Howard S. Erlanger, Legal Ambiguity and the Politics of Compliance: Affirmative Action Officers’Dilemma[J], 13 Law & Policy, (1991), p.73.
[218] Barbara A. Gutek, Disputes and Dispute-Processing in Organizations[J], 12 Studies in Law, Politics & Society, (1992), p.31.
[219] Yesheskel Hasenfeld, Jane A. Rafferty, & Mayer N. Zald, The Welfare State, Citizenship, and Bureaucratic Encounters[J], 13 Annual Review of Sociology, (1987), p.387.
[220] Arnold M. Zack, The Alliance for Education in Dispute Resolution: Leveling the PlayingField in Employment Mediation[J], 2 J. Alternative Dispute Resolution In Employment, 31 (Issue 2, Summer 2000).
[221] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.149-150.
[222] Charles B. Craver, Effective Legal Negotiation and Settlement[M], (4th ed. 2001), pp.458-466, quoting in Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.148-149.
[223] Stephen B. Goldberg & Jeanne M. Brett, An Experiment in the Mediation of Grievances[J], 106 Monthly Labor Review, No. 3, (Mar. 1983), at 23.
[224] Development in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (1996), p.1670.
[225] Hai Jiang, Do We Allow Contract Law to Administer Civil Rights Remedies? Casenote on Haskins v. Prudenial Insurance Co.[J], 2003 Law Review of Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, (2003), p.251.
[226] Hope B. Eastman & David M. Rothenstein, The Fate of Mandatory Employment Arbitration Amidst Growing Opposition: A Call for Common Ground[J], 20 Employee Relation Law Journal, (1995), p.595.
[227] Thomas J. Piskorski & David B. Ross, Private Arbitration as the Exclusive Means of Resolving Employment-Related Disputes[J], 19 Employee Relation Law Journal, (1993), p.209; and Irving R. Kaufman, Reform for a System in Crisis: Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal Courts[J], 59 Fordham Law Review I, (1990), p.2-3.
[228] ADR Technique Gaining Favor in Non-Traditional Settings[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA), No. 48, at C-1, (Mar. 15, 1993).
[229] Stephen L. Hayford & Michael J. Evers, The Interaction Between the Employment-At-Will Doctrine and Employer-Employee Agreements to Arbitrate Statutory Fair Employment Practices Claims: Difficult Choices for At-Will Employer[J], 73 North Carolina Law Review, (1995), p.494.
[230] Evan J. Spelfogel, Legal and Practical Implications of ADR and Arbitration in Employment Disputes[J], 11 Hofstra Labor Law Journal, (1993), p.269.
[231] Lisa B. Bingham, On Repeat Players, Adhesive Contracts, and the Use of Statistics in Judicial Review of Employment Arbitration Awards[J], 29 McGeorge Law Review, (1998), p.223.
[232] Monica J. Washington, Note, Compulsory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Disputes: Judicial Review Without Judicial Reformation[J], 74 New York University Law Review, (1999), p.844.
[233] Geraldine Szott Moohr, Arbitration and the Goals of Employment Discrimination Law[J], 56 Washington & Lee Law Review, (1999), p.395.
[234] Scott M. Nelson, The Proposed Civil Rights Procedures Protection Act: An Unlikely End to Mandatory Employee Arbitration Agreements?[J], 2 J. Alternative Dispute Resolution In Employment, (Summer 2000), p.19.
[235] Eduard A. Lopez, Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Discrimination Claims: Some Alternative Grounds for Lai, Duffield and Rosenberg[J], 4 Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, (2000), pp.3-4.
[236] Marlin M. Volz & Edward P. Goggin, How Arbitration Works[M], (5th ed. 1997), pp.142-143, quoting in Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.157-158.
[237] Michael Picher, Ronald L. Seeber & David B. Lipsky, The Arbitration Profession in Transition[M], pp.8-9 (2000).
[238] Kenneth R. Davis, A Model for Arbitration: Autonomy, Cooperation, and Curtailment of State Power[J], 26 Fordham Urban Law Journal, (1999), p.167.
[239] Leona Green, Mandatory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Disputes: A Public Policy Issue in Need of a Legislation Solution[J], 12 Notre Dame Journal of Legal Ethics & Public Policy, (1998), p.173.
3如:刘勇.就业公平保障法律制度研究[D].重庆大学博士学位论文.2005;翁里、宋丽燕.对就业歧视的法理探讨[J].兰州学刊.2004.6;娄耀雄.我国“就业歧视”的法理分析及对策[J].北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版).2004.3;肖玉.我国制度性就业歧视的法理学分析[D].吉林大学硕士学位论文.2005.
4如:(台)焦兴铠.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美所”,1996;李薇薇、Lisa Stearns. 禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006;喻术红.反就业歧视法律问题之比较研究[J].中国法学.2005.1;伍劲松.美国两性工作平等制度研究[J].法学家.2004.3;李炳安.欧盟与美国两性工作平等法制之比较[J].武汉大学学报(哲学与社会科学版).2004.3;曾恂.美国反就业歧视立法的启示[J].南方经济.2003.5.
5如:周伟.中国的劳动就业歧视:法律与现实[M].北京:法律出版社,2006;孙劲悦.关于就业年龄歧视原因的调查分析[J].财经问题研究.2004.4;赵友宝.女性就业歧视的经济学分析[J].山东科技大学学报(社科版).2005.1;卢汉龙、朱迪.社经视野下的就业歧视[J].社会观察.2005.7.
6如:竹文君.试论就业歧视及其公法规制[J].河北法学.2004.10;李继霞.关于就业歧视问题的法律思考[J]. 山东社会科学.2005.10;叶静漪、魏倩.健康就业歧视若干法律问题研究[J].人权.2004.3;许杏彬、张迎.论我国就业歧视之法律救济[J].中国劳动.2006.3.
8对此过程的详细叙述参见:邱小平.法律的平等保护——美国宪法第十四修正案第一款研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.40-49
9 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.)36(1873); Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3(1883); Hodges v. United States, 203 U.S. 1(1906).
10 Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
11 Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), at 551.
12 Brown v. Broad of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
13 Payne v. Western & A.R.R.. Co., 81 Tenn. 507, 519-20 (1884); Finger v. Koch & Schilling Brewing Co., 13 Mo.App. 310(1883); Martin v. New York Life Ins. Co., 148 N. Y. 117, 42 N. E. 416(1895).
14 H.R. 3986, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by Scanlon (Dem., Pa.); H.R. 4004, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by Dawson (Dem., Ill.); H.R. 4005, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. (1944) by LaFollette (Rep., Ind.).
16《1967年就业年龄歧视法》编入美国法典第29编第621条-第634条。
17《1990年残疾美国人法》编入美国法典第42编第12101条及以下。
18 See H.R. Rep. No. 485, 101st Cong., 2d sess., pt. 2, at 32(1990). See also Jane West, The Social and Policy Context of the Act, in The Americans with Disabilities Act: From Policy to Practice 5 (Jane West, ed. 1991).
19 42 U.S.C.§12101.
20《1973年康复法》编入美国法典第29编第701-794条。
21 29 U.S.C.§206(d)(1).
22 McAuliffe v. Mayor of New Bedford, 155 Mass. 216, 29 N.E. 517 (1892); Scopes v. Tennessee, 154 Tenn. 105, 289 S.W. 363 (1927).
23 Harless v. First National Bank, 162 W.Va. 116, 246 S.E. 2d 270 (1978).
24 Bell & Howell Co., 213 NLRB 407(1974), enforced 598 F. 2d 136 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
25 NLRB V. Reed & Prince Mfg. Co., 205 F.2d 131 (1st Cir. 1953). Wichita Eagle & Beacon Pub. Co., 222 NLRB 742 (1976).
26《1993年家庭及医疗休假法》编入美国法典第29编第2601条及以下。See, 29U.S.C.§2601 et seq.
27 Executive Order No. 11478, 34 Fed. Reg. 12985 (1969).
28 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(a).
29 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(b).
30 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(c).
31 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(d).
32 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3(a).
33 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3(b).
34参见以下三个指令第2条:《男女平等待遇指令》76/207/EEC (as amended by 2002/73EC)、《种族歧视指令》2000/43/EC及《就业歧视指令》2002/78/EC。引自:李薇薇、Lisa Stearns.禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.27
36 See, e.g., Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 985-86 (1988).
37 See, e.g., Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424(1971); Wards Cove Packing Co., v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 645-646(1989).
38 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
39 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989).
40 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2(m).
41 42 U.S.C.§2000e (f).
42 Restatement (Second) of Agency§220 (2) (1958).
43 42 U.S.C.§2000e (d).
44 See Bradley v. Pizzaco of Nebraska, 7 F. 3d 797, 798-99 (8th Cir. 1993).
45 See El-Hakem v. BJY, Inc., 415 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2005),法院裁定,姓名通常代表着其种族或民族。
46 See Tetro v. Elliott Popham Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, & GMC Trucks, Inc., 173 F.3d 988, 994-95 (6th Cir. 1999).
47 EEOC, Compliance Manual, Section 15: Race and Color Discrimination, pp.4-6.
48 See McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., 427 U.S. 273, 208 (1976),法院认为,第七章禁止针对所有人,包括白人的种族歧视。
49 See Mattioda v. White, 323 F.3d 1288 (10th Cir. 2003).
50 See Phelan v. City of Chicago, 347 F.3d 679, 684-85 (7th Cir. 2003).
51 See Walker v. Secretary of the Treasury, IRS, 713 F. Supp. 403, 405-08 (N.D. Ga. 1989).
52 See Santiago v. Stryker Corp., 10 F. Supp. 2d 93 (D.P.R. 1998).
53 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
54 110 Cong. Rec. 14270 (1964).
55 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324 (1977).
56 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 91 S.Ct. 849, 28 L.Ed 2d 158 (1971).
57 See Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Comm’n of City and County of San Francisco, 395 F. Supp. 378, 380-81 (D.C. Cal. 1976), cited with approval in Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977).
58 See Bryant v. Begin Manage Program, 281 F. Supp. 2d 561 (E.D.N.Y. 2003).
59 See Compare United States v. City of Warren, MI, 138 F. 3d 1083, 1094 (6th Cir. 1998), and NAACP v. Town of Harrison, NJ, 940 F. 2d 792, 799-805 (3d Cir. 1991).
60 See Ferrill v. The Parker Group, Inc., 168 F.3d 468 (11th Cir. 1999).
61 42 U.S.C.§2000e-3 (a).
62 See Johnson v. University of Cincinnati, 215 F.3d 561, 579-81 (6th Cir. 2000).
63 See Balicao v. University of Minnesota, 737 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1984), and Smith v. Secretary of Navy, 659 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
64 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors, I, 1999.
65 See Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 22 (1993).该案是一个关于性骚扰的案件,但是该案确定的这两项条件仍然适用于所有的违反第七章或者是《残疾美国人法》和《就业年龄歧视法》的骚扰案件。
66 Kang v. U. Lim America, 296 F. 3d 810, 817 (9th Cir. 2002).
67 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 80-81, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed. 2d 201 (1998).
68 Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. at 21 (1993).
69 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 15: Race and Color Discrimination, 15-37.
70 See Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc., 333 F. 3d 906 (8th Cir. 2003), and Williams v. New York City Housing Auth., 154 F. Supp. 2d 820 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
71 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 2290, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998) ; Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S. Ct. 2269 (1998).
72 See Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004).
73 See Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 765, 118 S.Ct. 2257, 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998).
74 Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742,118 S. Ct. 2270 (1998).
75 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors,§V(C)(1).
76 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 2293, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998) .
77 See Miller v. Kenworth of Dothan, Inc., 277 F.3d 1269, 1278-79 (11th Cir. 2002).
78 Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 330 (2003).
79 EEOC, Guidelines on Discrimination Because of National Origin, 29 C.F.R.§1606.1.
80 110 Cong. Rec. 2549 (1964); H.R. Rep. No. 914, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. 87 (1963).
81 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination, 13-II (A).
82 Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins. Co., 791 F.2d 888 (11th Cir. 1986).
83 See Molerio v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 749 F.2d 815 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
84 See Tenenbaum v. Caldera, 45 Fed. Appx. 416, 418 (6th Cir. 2002) (unpublished), quoted in EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination, 13-III (B) (1).
85 Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 888 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1989).
86 Carino v. University of Oklahoma Board of Regents, 750 F.2d 815 (10th Cir. 1984).
87 See Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 888 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1989).
88 Vasquez v. McAllen Bag & Supply Co., 660 F.2d 686 (5th Cir. 1981).
89 Yniguez v. Mofford, 42 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 1995), vacated as moot, 520 U.S. 43 (1997).
90 Garcia v. Rush-Prebyterian-St. Luke’s Med. Ctr., 660 F.2d 1217, 1222 (7th Cir. 1981).
91 EEOC v. Premier Operator Service, Inc., 113 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (N.D. Tex. 2000).
92 EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 13: National Origin Discrimination 13-V (C).
93 Espinoza v. Farah Mfg. Co., 414 U.S. 86, 94 S.Ct. 334, 38 L.Ed.2d 287 (1973).
94 See Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 122 S. Ct. 1275, 1283-84 (2002).
95该法编入美国法典第8编第1324条及以下。
96 8 U.S.C.§1324 b.
97 42 U.S.C. 2000e (j).
98 United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965), and Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970).
99 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.1.
100 See Maberry v. McKune, 24 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (D. Kan. 1998), and Van Koten v. Family Health Management, Inc., 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 1837 (7th Cir. 1998).
101 Brown v. Pena, 441 F. Supp. 1382 (S.D. Fla. 1977), 589 F.2d 1113 (5th Cir. 1979).
102 42 U.S. 2000e-2 (f).
103 Young v. Southwestern Savings & Loan Ass’n, 509 F.2d 140 (5th Cir. 1975).
104 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.3 (b)(2).
105 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.3 (b)(3).
106 Moore v. KUKA Welding Sys. & Robot Corp., 171 F.3d 1073, 1080 (6th Cir. 1999); See also Logan v. Denny’s, Inc., 259 F.3d 558, 568-69 (6th Cir. 2001).
107 Kocsis v. Multi-Care Management, Inc., 97 F.3d 876, 887 (6th Cir. 1996), quoting in Held v. Gulf Oil Co., 684 F.2d 427, 432 (6th Cir. 1982).
108 Harris v. Forklift Sys., 510 U.S. 17, 23, 126 L.Ed.2d 295, 114 S. Ct. 367 (1993); accord Abeita v. TransAmerica Mailings, Inc., 159 F.3d 246, 251 (6th Cir. 1998); Hafford v. Seidner, 183 F.3d 506, 512 (6th. Cir. 1999).
109 29 C.F.R. 1605.1(a)(2), 31 FR 3870 (1966).
110 29 C.F.R. 1605.1(b)(c), 32 FR 10298.
111 Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63, 97 S. Ct. 2264, 53 L. Ed. 2d 113 (1977).
112 EEOC, Appendix A to§§1605.2 and 1605.3-Background Information, 29 CFR Ch. XIV (7-1-03 Edition), pp.195-196.
113 Brown v. Polk County, Iowa, 61 F.3d 650, 654 (8th Cir. 1995).
114 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Religion, 29 C.F.R.§1605.2 (d)(1)(i)(ii)(iii).
115 Ansonia Board of Education v. Philbrook, 479 U.S. 60, 107 S. Ct. 367, 93 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1986).
116 Wilson v. U.S. West Communications, 58 F.3d 1337 (8th Cir. 1995).
117 Bhatia v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 734 F.2d 1382 (9th Cir. 1984).
118 United States v. Board of Education for School District of Philadelphia, 911 F.2d 882 (3d Cir. 1990).
119 McDaniel v. Essex Int’l, Inc., 696 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1982).
120 29 U.S.C.§169.
121 Larson v. Valenta, 456 U.S. 228, 102 U. Ct. 1673, 72 L.Ed.2d 33 (1982).
122 Thornton v. Caldor, 472 U.S. 703, 105 S.Ct. 2914, 86 L.Ed.2d 557 (1985).
123 Corporation of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327, 107 S. Ct. 2862, 97 L.Ed.2d 273 (1987).
124 EEOC v. Townley Engineering & Mfg. Co., 759 F.2d 610 (9th Cir. 1988).
125 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 (e)(2).
126 General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125, 97 S. Ct. 401, 50 L. Ed. 2d 343 (1976).
127 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed.2d 201 (1998).
128 Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, 442 F.2d 385, 3 FEP 337 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 950 (1971).
129 Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702, 98 S.Ct. 1370, 55 L.Ed.2d 657 (1978).
130 Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, 463 U.S. 1073, 103 S.Ct. 3492, 77 L.Ed.2d 1236 (1983).
131 Phillips v. Martin Marietta, 400 U.S. 542, 3 FEP 40 (1971).
132 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R. 1604.4.
133 Sprogis v. United Air Lines, 444 F.2d 1194, 3 FEP 621 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 991, 4 FEP 37 (1971).
134 General Electric Co. v. Gilbert et al, 429 U.S. 125, 97 S.Ct. 401, 50 L.Ed.2d 343 (1976).
135 42 U.S.C.§2000e (k).
136 International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L. Ed. 2d 158 (1991).
137 See Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, 434 U.S. 136, 98 S. Ct. 347, 54 L. Ed. 2d 356 (1977); Compare Abraham v. Graphic Arts Int’l Union, 660 F. 2d 811 (D. C. Cir. 1981).
138 Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. EEOC, 462 U.S. 669, 103 S. Ct. 2622, 77 L. Ed. 2d 89 (1983).
139 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604. 11 (a).
140 Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 64-67, (1986).
141 Reichman v. Bureau of Affirmative Action, 536 F. Supp. 1149 (M. D. Pa. 1982).
142 DeCintio v. Westchester County Med. Cent., 807 F. 2d 304 (2d Cir. 1986).
143 Simmons v. Lyons, 746 F. 2d 265 (5th Cir. 1984).
144 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 118 S. Ct. 998, 140 L. Ed. 2d 201 (1998).
145 Nichols v. Azteca Restaurant Enterprises, 256 F. 3d 864 (9th Cir. 2001).
146 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604.11 (d).
147 Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S. Ct. 2275, 141 L. Ed 2d 662 (1998); Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998).
148 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C. F. R. 1604.11 (e).
149 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 109 S.Ct. 1775, 104 L.Ed 2d 268 (1989).
150 DeSantis v. Pacific Tel. & Co., 608 F. 2d 327 (9th Cir. 1979); Sommers v. Budget Mkt., Inc., 667 F. 2d 748 (8th Cir. 1982).
151 Thompson v. Sawyer, 678 F. 2d 257 (D.C. Cir. 1982); 29 C.F.R.§1620.14 (1987).
152 Hein v. Oregon College of Educ., 718 F. 2d 910 (9th Cir. 1983).
153 D’Alema v. Appalachian Communities, 55 FEP (BNA) 1426, 1428 (N.D. Ga. 1991); see 29 C.F.R.§1620.9 (b).
154 29 U.S.C.§213 (a).
155 See 29 U.S.C. 621.
156 29 U.S.C. 623 (a).
157 See 29 U.S.C. 623 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e) and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2.
158 Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, 427 U.S. 307 (1976), see also Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93 (1979).
159 See Hazen Paper Company v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604, 113 S.Ct. 1701, 123 L.Ed.2d 338 (1993).
160 County of Washington, Ore. v. Gunther, 452 U.S. 161, 170-71, 68 L.Ed.2d 751, 101 S.Ct. 2242 (1981).
161 See DiBiase v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 48 F.3d 719, 732-34 (3d Cir. 1995); EEOC v. Francis W. Parker School, 41 F.3d 1073, 1076-77 (7th Cir. 1994); Lyon v. Ohio Educ. Ass’n & Professional Staff Union, 53 F.3d 135, 138-39 (6th Cir. 1995).
162 Ellis v. United Airlines, Inc., 73 F.3d 999 (10th Cir. 1996).
163 Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio v. Betts, 492 U.S. 158, 109 S.Ct. 2854, 106 L.Ed.2d 134 (1989).
164 EEOC, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 C.F.R.§1625.10 (b).
165 Professional Pilots Federation v. Federal Aviation Administration, 118 F.3d 758 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
166 See 29 U.S.C.§623(j).
167 29 U.S.C.§623 (f)(2)(B)(ii).
168 Solon v. Gary Community School Corp., 180 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 1999).
169 29 U.S.C.§626 (f)(1).
170 EEOC, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 C.F.R.§1625.22 (a)(3).
171 Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc., 522 U.S. 422, 118 S.Ct. 838, 139 L.Ed. 849 (1998).
172 See Findings and Purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.§12101.
173 H.R. Rep. No. 485, 101st Cong., 2d sess., pt. 2. at 32 (1990).
174 42 U.S.C.§12101 (b).
175 42 U.S.C.§12112 (a).
176 See S. Rep. No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 21 (1989); and H.R. Rep. No. 485 part 3, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 27 (1989).
177 EEOC, Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (h).
178 See S. Rep. No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 22-23 (1989); and H.R. Rep. No. 485 part 3, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 28-29 (1989).
179 Amir v. St. Louis University, 184 F.3d 1017 (8th Cir. 1999)
180 Pack v. Kmart Corp., 166 F.3d 1399 (10th Cir. 1999).
181 Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 118 S.Ct. 2196, 141 L.Ed.2d 540 (1998).
182 Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002).
183 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (j).
184 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (j)(3).
185 Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 517 U.S. 471, 491, 144 L.Ed.2d 450, 119 S.Ct. 2139 (1999).
186 Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002).
187 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (l).
188 School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 107 S.Ct. 1123, 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987).该案是根据康复法作出的判决,但该案的判决意见仍然适用于根据《残疾美国人法》提起的诉讼。
189 EEOC, Appendix to Part 1630-Interpretive Guidance on Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 CFR Ch. XIV (7-1-03 Edition), p.354.
190 Cook v. Rhode Island Department of Mental Health, Retardation, & Hosps., 10 F.3d 17, 23-24 (1st Cir. 1993).
191 42 U.S.C.§12211 (a)(b).
192 42 U.S.C.§12111(8).
193 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (n)(2)(3).
194 Borkowski v. Valley Central School District, 63 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 1995).
195 29 C.F.R.§1630.4.
196 42 U.S.C.§12112 (b).
197 See Koshinski v. Decatur Foundry, Inc., 177 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 1999), and Mantolete v. Bolger, 767 F.2d 1416 (9th Cir. 1985).
198 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (r).
199 Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 118 S.Ct. 2196, 141 L.Ed.2d 540 (1998).
200 School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 107 S.Ct. 1123, 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987).
201 Chalk v. United States District Court, 840 F.2d 701 (9th Cir. 1988).
202 Estate of Mauro v. Borgess Med. Ctr., 137 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 1998).
203 Wood v. Omaha School District, 25 F.3d 667, 669 (8th Cir. 1994).
204 Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, 119 S.Ct. 2162 (1999).
205 Hamlin v. Charter Township of Flint, 165 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 1999).
206 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Preemployment Disability-Related Questions and Medical Examination Under
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 8 FEP Manual (BNA) 405: 7197 (1995).
207 See Executive Order No. 13145, To Prohibit Discrimination in Federal Employment Based on Genetic Information, 65 Fed. Reg. 6877 (Feb. 8, 2000).
208 See Smith v. Chrysler Corp., 155 F.3d 799 (6th Cir. 1998).
209 See Griffin v. Steeltek Inc., 160 F.3d 591 (10th Cir. 1998); and Fredenburg v. Contra Costa County Department of Health Services, 172 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 1999).
210 42 U.S.C.§12112 (d) (3).
211 See Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Lab., 135 F.3d 1260 (9th Cir. 1998).
212 42 U.S.C.§12112 (d) (4).
213 Deckert v. City of Ulysses, No. 93-1295-PFK, 1995 WL 580074 (D. Kan. Sept. 6, 1995).
214 EEOC, Enforcement Guidance: Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Job-Related and Consistent with Business Necessity, 7/27/2000.
215 EEOC Enforcement Guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act and Psychiatric Disabilities, 8 FEP Manual (BNA) 405: 7469 (1997).
216 42 U.S.C.§12112 (b) (5).
217 Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 29 C.F.R.§1630.2 (o).
218 Schmidt v. Safeway Inc., 864 F. Supp. 991, 996-97, 3 AD Cas. (BNA) 1141, 1145-46 (D.Or. 1994).
219 Criado v. IBM, 145 F.3d 437, 444-45, 8 AD Cas. (BNA) 336, 341 (1st Cir. 1998).
220 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 1521 (2002).
221 Haysman v. Food Lion, Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1092, 1104, 4 AD Cas. (BNA) 1297, 1305 (S.D. Ga. 1995).
222 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, 1523 (2002).
223 Hendricks-Robinson v. Excel Corp., 154 F.3d 685, 8 AD Cas. (BNA) 875, 882 (7th Cir. 1998).
224 Templeton v. Neodata Servs., Inc., No. 98-1106, 1998 WL 852516 (10th Cir. Dec. 10, 1998); and Beck v. University of Wis. Bd. of Regents, 75 F.3d 1130, 1134, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 304, 307 (7th Cir. 1996).
225 Stewart v. Happy Herman’s Cheshire Bridge, Inc., 117 F.3d 1278, 1285-86, 6 AD Cas. (BNA) 1834, 1839 (11th Cir. 1997).
226 Hankins v. The Gap, Inc., 84 F.3d 797, 801, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 924, 927 (6th Cir. 1996).
227 42 U.S.C.§12111 (10).
228 Stone v. Mount Vernon, 118 F.3d 92, 101, 6 AD Cas. (BNA) 1685, 1693 (2d Cir. 1997).
229 Senate Report No. 101-116, at 36 (1989).
230 See, e.g., Monette v. Electronic Data Sys. Corp., 90 F.3d 1173, 1184 n.10, 5 AD Cas. (BNA) 1326, 1335 n.10 (6th Cir. 1996); Vande Zande v. Wisconsin Department of Admin., 44 F.3d 538, 543, 3 AD Cas. (BNA) 1636, 1638-39 (7th Cir. 1995).
231 See Cong. Rec. H2475 (1990).
232 US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 122 S.Ct. 1516, (2002).
233 Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604 (1993).
234 Earley v. Champion Int’l Corp., 907 F.2d 1077, 1081 (11th Cir. 1990).
235 Slack v. Havens, 7 FEP 885 (S.D. Cal. 1973), affirmed as modified, 522 F.2d 1091 (9th Cir. 1975).
236 Suggs v. ServiceMaster Education Food Management, 72 F.3d 1228, 1231 (6th Cir. 1996).
237 Boutros v Canton Regional Transit Auth., 997 F.2d 198, 201 (6th Cir. 1993).
238 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).
239第703(a)(1)条规定雇主不得因为种族而歧视雇员或职位申请人;第704(a)条规定雇主因为某人参与了受到该法保护的活动而对该人进行报复,也属于歧视行为。
240 Lynn v. Deaconess Med. Center, 160 F.3d 484 (8th Cir. 1998).
241 William v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 85 F.3d 270 (7th Cir. 1996).
242 Enowmbitang v. Seagate Tech., 148 F.3d 973 (8th Cir. 1998).
243 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981).
244 See Loeb v. Textron, Inc., 600 F.2d 1003, 1011-1012, n. 5 (C.A.1 1979).
245 See EEOC v. Associated Dry Goods Corp., 449 U.S. 590, 101 S.Ct. 817, 66 L.Ed.2d 762 (1981).
246 St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993).
247 Fisher v. Vassar College, 114 F.3d 1332 (2d Cir. 1997).
248 See Beaird v. Seagate Technology, Inc., 145 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 1998); Shaw v. HCA Health Servs. Of Midwest, Inc., 79 F.3d 99 (8th Cir. 1996); Barbour v. Merrill, 58 F.3d 1270 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
249 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 109 S.Ct. 1775, 104 L.Ed.2d 268 (1989).
250 See Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1989); Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc., 490 U.S. 900 (1989); Martin v. Wilks, 490 U.S. 755 (1989); Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989).
251 Tyler v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 958 F.2d 1176 (2d Cir. 1992).
252 Desert Palace v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90 (2003).
253指42 U.S.C.§2000e (m)对证实(demonstrates)的定义:用语“证实(demonstrates)”指完成举证责任和说服责任。
254 Los Angeles Department of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702 (1978).
255 110 Cong. Rec. 14270 (1964).
256 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977).
257 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396, 360, n46, (1977).
258 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 805, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).
259 Hazelwood School District v. United States, 433 U.S. 299 (1977).
260 See EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 839 F.2d 302 (7th Cir. 1988).
261 See, e.g., Smith v. Virginia Commonwealth University, 84 F.3d 622 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc); Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385, 106 S.Ct. 3000, 92 L.Ed.2d 315 (1986).
262 EEOC, Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.4.D.
263 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 417-418, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
264 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (e) (1).
265 See, e.g. Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 332-37 (1977); Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 122-25 (1985).
266 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al. v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L.Ed 2d 158 (1991).
267 Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 442 F.2d 385 (5th Cir. 1971), and Western Air Lines, Inc. v. Criswell,
472 U.S. 400, 105 S.Ct. 2743, 86 L.Ed.2d 321 (1985).
268 Weeks v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 408 F.2d 228 (th Cir. 1969), and Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
269 City of Los Angeles v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 720, 709 (1978).
270 Rosenfeld v. Southern Pac. Co., 444 F.2d 1219 (9th Cir. 1971).
271 Hardin v. Stynchcomb, 691 F.2d 1364 (11th Cir. 1982); Wright v. Olin Corp., 697 F.2d 1172 (4th Cir. 1982).
272 See Lust v. Sealy, Inc., 383 F.3d 580, 583 (7th Cir. 2004), and Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free School District, 365 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2004).
273 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R.§1604.2 (a)(1).
274 Kern v. Dynalectron Corp., 577 F.Supp. 1196 (N.D. Tex. 1983), affirmed 746 F.2d 810 (1984).
275 Pime v. Loyola University of Chicago, 803 F.2d 351 (7th Cir. 1986).
276 110 Cong. Rec. 2549.
277 Rosenfeld v. Southern Pac. Co., 444 F.2d 1219 (9th Cir. 1971).
278 EEOC Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex, 29 C.F.R.§1604.2 (b)(1).
279 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al. v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 111 S. Ct. 1196, 113 L.Ed 2d 158 (1991).
280 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (h).
281 Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, 434 U.S. 136 (1977).
282 California Brewers Association v. Bryant, 444 U.S. 598, 100 S.Ct. 814, 63 F.Ed.2d 55 (1980).
283 James v. Stockham Valves & Fittings Co., 559 F.2d 310 (5th Cir. 1977).
284 Quarles v. Philip Morris, 279 F.Supp. 505 (E.D. Va. 1968).
285 See International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d (1977); United Airlines, Inc. v. Evans, 431 U.S. 553, 97 S.Ct. 1885, 52 L.Ed.2d 571 (1977).
286 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d (1977).
287 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (k).
288 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 91 S.Ct. 849, 28 L.Ed.2d 158 (1971).
289 EEOC Guidelines on Employment Testing Procedures, issued August 24, 1966.
290 See, e.g., United States v. City of Chicago, 400 U.S. 8, 91 S.Ct. 18, 27 L.Ed.2d 9 (1970).
291 Gaston County v. United States, 395 U.S. 285, 89 S.Ct. 1720, 23 L.Ed.2d 309 (1969).
292 EEOC v. Warshawsky & Co., 867 F.Supp. 647 (N.D. I11. 1991).
293 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 335, n.15 (1977).
294 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
295 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 335, n.15 (1977).
296 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254-256 (1981).
297 Wards Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 109 S.Ct. 2115, 104 L.Ed.2d 733 (1989).
298 The Civil Rights Act of 1991,§2 (2), 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
299 The Civil Rights Act of 1991,§3 (2), 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
300 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
301 Chavez v. Coors Brewing Co., 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 5300 (10th Cir. 1999).
302 Fudge v. City of Providence Fire Department, 766 F.2d 650 (1st Cir. 1985).
303 Hazelwood School District v. United States, 433 U.S. 299, 97 S.Ct. 2736, 53 L.Ed.2d 768 (1977).
304 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
305 Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
306 EEOC, The Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, 29 C.F.R.§1607.4D (1993).
307 EEOC v. Joint Apprenticeship Comm., 164 F.3d 89 (2d Cir. 1998).
308 See, e.g., United States v. City of Warren, 138 F.3d 1083 (10th Cir. 1998), and Newark Branch, NAACP v. City of Bayonne, 134 F.3d 113 (3d Cir. 1998).
309 EEOC v. Chicago Miniature Lamp Works, 947 F.2d 292 (7th Cir. 1991).
310 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
311 Fitzpatrick v. City of Atlanta, 2 F.3d 1112 (11th Cir. 1993).
312 Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 108 S.Ct. 2777, 101 L.Ed.2d 827 (1988).
313 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
314 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. at 431.
315 See, e.g., Local 189, United Papermakers & Papermakers v. United States, 416 F.2d 980, 995 (5th Cir. 1969, cert. denied, 397 U.S. 919 (1970).
316 See, e.g., United States v. N. L. Indus., Inc., 479 F.2d 354, 365-66 (8th Cir. 1973).
317 See, e.g., Townsend v. Nassau County Medical Center, 558 F.2d 117, 120 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1015 (1978).
318 See, e.g., United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 446 F.2d 652, 662 (2d Cir. 1971); Robinson v. Lorillard Corp., 444 F.2d 791, 798 (4th Cir.), cert. dismissed under Rule 60, 404 U.S. 1006 (1971).
319 Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 432 (1971).
320 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971); Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975); Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977); New York Transit Authority v. Beazer, 440 U.S. 568 (1979); and Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977 (1988).
321 Lanning v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 181 F.3d 478 (3d Cir. 1999).
322 Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 53 L.Ed.2d 786 (1977).
323 See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
324 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
325 See Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440, 102 S.Ct. 2525, 73 L.Ed.2d 130 (1982).
326 42 U.S.C.§2000-e (h).
327 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
328 Uniform Guidelines of Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.16W.
329 Uniform Guidelines of Employee Selection Procedures (1978), 29 C.F.R.§1607.6A-C.
330 See Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975); and Watkins v. Scott Paper Co., 530 F.2d 1159 (5th Cir. 1976).
331 Boston Chapter, NAACP, Inc. v. Beecher, 504 F.2d 1017 (1st Cir. 1974).
332 United States v. Chicago, 549 F.2d 415 (7th Cir. 1977), on remand 437 F.Supp. 256 (N.D. Ill. 1977), judgment affirmed 567 F.2d 730 (7th Cir. 1977).
333 Guardians Association of New York City Police Department, Inc. v. Civil Service Commission of New York,
630 F.2d 79 (2d Cir. 1980); Gilbert v. Little Rock, Ark., 722 F.2d 1390 (8th Cir. 1983); 29 C.F.R.§1607.5H.
334 William v. Ford Motor Co., 187 F.3d 533 (6th Cir. 1999).
335 See, e.g., Rowe v. General Motors Corp., 457 F.2d 348 (5th Cir. 1972); Brown v. Gaston County Dyeing Mach. Co., 457 F.2d 1377 (4th Cir. 1972).
336 See, e.g. Scott v. Parkview Memorial Hospital, 175 F.3d 523 (7th Cir. 1999); Ezold v. Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, 983 F.2d 509 (3d Cir. 1992).
337 See, e.g., Stallworth v. Shuler, 777 F.2d 1431 (11th Cir. 1985).
338 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.1 (c).
339 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (j).
340 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (g).
341 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.1 (c).
342 See EEOC, et al., Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978).
343 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.3.
344 United Steelworker of America, AFL-CIO-CLC, v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 61 L.Ed.2d 480 (1979).
345 Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
346 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.4.
347 See, the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council“Policy Statement on Affirmative Action Programs for State and Local Government Agencies”, 41 FR 38814 (September 13, 1976), reaffirmed and extended to all persons subject to Federal equal employment opportunity laws and orders, in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978) 43 FR 38290; 38300 (Aug. 25, 1978).
348 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.4 (c) (2).
349 42 U.S.C.§2000e-12 (b) (1).
350 EEOC, Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended, 29 C.F.R.§1608.2.
351也有人认为联邦最高法院解读的《1964年民权法》第七章的立法目的是缺乏根据的。See, George Schatzki, United Steelworkers of America v. Weber: An Exercise in Understandable Indecision, Washington Law Review, Vol. 56, (1980), pp.66-67.
352 Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987), n.8.
353 W.R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 79, Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757, 103 S.Ct. 2177, 76 L.Ed.2d 298 (1983).
354 See Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
355 Id.
356 United States v. Board of Education of the Township of Piscataway, 91 F.3d 1547 (3d Cir. 1996) (en banc).
357 Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, 476 U.S. 267, 106 S.Ct. 1842, 90 L.Ed.2d 260 (1986); and Paul E. Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987).
358 United States v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 8 FEP 1089, 1106 (E.D. La. 1974).
359 41 C.F.R.§60-1.40 (a) and (b).
360 41 C.F.R.§60-2.11 (b) (1).
361 41 C.F.R.§60-4.4 to 4.6.
362 41 C.F.R.§60-2.12 (e).
363 Legal Aid Society of Alameda County v. Brennan, 608 F.2d 1319 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 921, 100 S.Ct. 3010, 65 L.Ed.2d 1112 (1980).
364 42 U.S.C.§2000e-2 (n).
365 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States et al., 431 U.S. 324, 97 S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977).
366 Local 28, Sheet Metal Workers v. EEOC, 478 U.S. 421, 106 S.Ct. 3019, 92 L.Ed.2d 344 (1986).
367 United States v. Paradise, 480 U.S. 149, 107 S.Ct. 1053, 94 L.Ed.2d 203 (1987).
368 See Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Federico Pena, et al., 515 U.S. 200, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995).
369 Metro Broadcasting v. FCC, 497 U.S. 547, 110 S.Ct. 2997, 111 L.Ed.2d 445 (1990).
370 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Federico Pena, et al., 515 U.S. 200, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995).
371 Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989).
372 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 965 F.Supp. 1556, 1576-1577 (D. Colo. 1997).
373 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
374 EEOC, Procedural Regulations, 29 C.F.R. Part 1601 (2007); EEOC, Procedures for Coordinating the Investigation of Complaints or Charges of Employment Discrimination Based on Disability Subject to the Americans With Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Action of 1973, 29 C.F.R. Part 1640 (2007).
375 Waiters v. Robert Bosch Co., 683 F.2d 89, 92 (4th Cir. 1982).
376 Weeks v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 408 F.2d 228 (5th Cir. 1969).
377 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (c).
378 Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250 (1980).
379 Wolfolk v. Rivera, 729 F.2d 1114, 1117 (7th Cir. 1984).
380 Reeb v. Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc., 516 F.2d 924 (5th Cir. 1975).
381 See Tucker v. United Parcel Serv., 657 F.2d 724 (5th Cir, 1981); Contra Hamilton v. 1st Source Bank, 895 F.2d 159 (4th Cir. 1990).
382 See Scheerer v. Rose State College, 950 F.2d 661 (10th Cir. 1991); Pearson v. Macon-Bibb County Hospital Authority, 952 F.2d 1274 (11th Cir. 1992).
383 Sabree v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters, Local 33, 921 F.2d 396 (1st Cir. 1990).
384 Lorance v. AT & T Technologies, 490 U.S. 900, 109 S.Ct. 2261, 104 L.Ed.2d 961 (1989).
385 42 U.S.C.§2000e-5 (e) (2).
386 Philbin v. General Elec. Capital Auto Lease, Inc., 929 F.2d 321 (7th Cir. 1991).
387 Contra Shempert v. Harwick Chemical Co., 151 F.3d 793 (8th Cir. 1998).
388 29 U.S.C.§161 (2).
389 Crowley v. Prince George’s County, Maryland, 890 F.2d 683 (4th Cir. 1989).
390 Northeastern Florida Chapter of Assoc. Gen. Contractors v. City of Jacksonville, Florida, 508 U.S. 656 (1993).
391 Calloway v. National Health Plans, 986 F.2d 446 (11th Cir. 1993); Allen v. United States Steel Corp., 665 F.2d
689 (5th Cir. 1982).
392 Greenwood v. Ross, 778 F.2d 448 (8th Cir. 1985).
393 Terrell v. United States Pipe & Foundry Co., 644 F.2d 1112 (5th Cir. 1981).
394 Sanchez v. Standard Brands, Inc., 431 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1970).
395 Occidental Life Ins. Co. v. EEOC, 432 U.S. 355 (1977).
396 See EEOC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 668 F.2d 1199 (11th Cir. 1982).
397 29 U.S.C.§626 (b).
398 See United States v. Burke, 504 U.S. 229 (1992).
399 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975).
400 McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co., 427 U.S. 273, 96 S.Ct. 2574, 49 L.Ed.2d 493 (1976).
401 Saunders v. Claytor, 629 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1980).
402 Brown v. East Miss. Elec. Power Assn., 989 F.2d 858, 863 (5th Cir. 1993).
403 See Goss v. Exxon Office Systems Co., 747 F.2d 885 (3d Cir. 1984).
404 Patterson v. American Tobacco Co., 535 F.2d 257 (4th Cir. 1976).
405 42 U.S.C.§1981, and see Johnson v. Railroad Express Agency, 421 U.S. 454 (1975).
406 Turic v. Holland Hospitality, Inc., 85 F.3d 1211 (6th Cir. 1996).
407 42 U.S.C.§1981a (b) (1).
408 Romasanta v. United Air Lines, Inc., 717 F.2d 1140 (7th Cir. 1983).
409 Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 111, 114 (1992).
410 Love v. Mayor of Cheyenne, 620 F.2d 235 (10th Cir. 1980).
411 New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. Carey, 447 U.S. 54 (1980).
412 Walker v. NationsBank of Florida, N.A. 53 F.3d 1548 (11th Cir. 1995).
413 Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412, 98 S.Ct. 694, 54 L.Ed.2d 648 (1978).
414 The Civil Rights Act of 1991, Section 118, 42 U.S.C.§1981 note.
415 9 U.S.C.§1.
416 Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974).
417 Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991).
418 Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp., 525 U.S. 70, 119 S.Ct. 391, 142 L.Ed.2d 361 (1998).
419 9 U.S.C.§10 (a).
420 Halligan v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., 148 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 1998).
[1] [美]卢瑟·S·路德克主编.王波等译.美国的社会与文化:构建美国[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.273.
[2] [英]J·R·波尔著.张聚国译.美国平等的历程[M].北京:商务印书馆,2007.35.
[3] [美]路易斯·梅南德著.肖凡,鲁帆译.美国观念的故事:哲学俱乐部[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2006.7.
[4] [美]J·布卢姆等著.杨国标,张儒林译.美国的历程(上)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1988.531-536.
[5] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 366-367.
[6] Hale, Rights Under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment Against Injuries Inflicted by Private Individuals[J], 6 Lawyer Guild Review, 627(1946).
[7] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 371-372.
[8] [美]阿奇博尔德·考克斯著.田雷译.法院与宪法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.266-267.
[9] [美]霍维茨著.信春鹰,张志铭译.沃伦法院对正义的追求[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.46.
[10] Will Maslow; Joseph B. Robison, Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862-1952[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Spring, 1953), pp. 392-393.
[11] Wayne A. Santoro, The Civil Rights Movement’s Struggle for Fair Employment: A“Dramatic Event-Conventional Politics”Model[J], Social Forces, Vol. 81, No. 1. (Sep., 2002), p. 179.
[12] Wayne A. Santoro, The Civil Rights Movement’s Struggle for Fair Employment: A“Dramatic Event-Conventional Politics”Model, Social Forces, Vol. 81, No. 1. (Sep., 2002), p. 186.
[13] [法]法兰斯瓦·戴丰泰特著.王若璧译.种族歧视[M].台北:远流出版公司,1990.
[14] Robert Bork, Civil Rights: A Challenge[J], The New Republic, Aug. 31, 1963, p. 22.
[15] Paula England, Neoclassical Economists’Theories of Discrimination[A], in edited by PaulBurstein, Equal Employment Opportunity: Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Aldine de Gruyter, 1994, p. 59.
[16] Gray Becker, The Economics of Discrimination[M], 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957.
[17] Kenneth Arrow, Models of Job Discrimination[A], pp. 83-102 in Racial Discrimination in Economics Life[C], edited by A. Pascal. Lexington, MA: Lexington, Heath.
[18] Janice F. Madden, The Economics of Sex Discrimination, Lexington, MA: Lexington 1973.
[19] John J. Donohue III, Is Title VII Efficient?[J] The University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 134, (1986), pp. 1411-1431.
[20] [美]凯斯·R·孙斯坦著.金朝武,胡爱平,乔聪启译.自由市场与社会正义[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.201-223.
[21] Vaas, Title VII: Legislative History[J], 7 Bost. C. Ind. & Comm. L. Rev. 431, 441 (1966).
[22] Michael J. Zimmer, and Others, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, New York, 2000, p.739.
[23] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 121.
[24] Krauskopf, Employment Discharge: Survey and Critique of the Modern Employment at Will Rule[J], 51 U.M.K.C.L. Rev. 189, 215(1983).
[25] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 625.
[26] (台)郑丽娇.美国「平等就业机会委员会」推行两性工作平等政策成效之评估研究[A].载焦兴铠主编.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美研究所”,1996.246-247.
[27] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.冯克利.至上的美德:平等的理论与实践[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2003.1.
[28] [英]戴维·米勒等.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1992. 204.
[29] Black’s Law Dictionary[Z], 6th ed. p. 467.
[30]国际人权法教程项目组.国际人权法教程[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002. 398.
[31] [美]约翰·罗尔斯.姚大志译.作为公平的正义——正义新论[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002. 70.
[32] Deborah J. Lockton, Employment Law[M], Fourth Edition, Palgrave MacMillan 2003, pp.125-135.
[33] [英]凯瑟琳·巴纳德著.付欣译.欧盟劳动法[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2005. 225.
[34] Alfred W. Blumrosen, Strangers in Paradise: Griggs v. Duke Co. and the Concept of Employment Discrimination[A], in edited by Paul Burstein: Equal Employment Opportunity:Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York, 1994, pp. 109-110.
[35] Barbara Lindemann Schlei, Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law[M], The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1976.
[36] Michael J. Zimmer, et al., Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000.
[37] Samuel Estreicher, et al., Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000.
[38] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p. 1580.
[39] (台)焦兴铠.对我国就业歧视问题之探讨[A].劳工法论丛(一)[C].台北:元照出版公司,2000.552,转引自:喻术红.反就业歧视法律问题之比较研究[J].中国法学,2005(1).131.
[40] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p. 1647-1648.
[41] James E. Holloway, A Primer on Employment Policy for Contingent Work: Less Employment Regulation Through Fewer Employer-Employee Relations[J], 20 T. Marshall L. Rev. 27, 33-35. (1994).
[42] U.S. Departments. of Labor & Commerce, Report and Recommendations of the Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations[R], pp38-39.
[43] R.Blanpain & C.Engels (ed.), Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations in Industrialized Market Economies[C], Kluwer Law International, 2001, pp. 369-370.
[44] Morris B. Abram, Affirmative Action: Fair Shakers and Social Engineers[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 99, 1986, p. 1312.
[45] Samuel Estreicher, Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, p. 45.
[46] Herbert Hill, Black Labor and the American Legal System: Race, Work, and the Law[A], in edited by Paul Burstein, Equal Employment Opportunity: Labor Market Discrimination and Public Policy[C], Aldine de Gruyter, 1994, p.8.
[47] Id, pp.9-11.
[48] Council of Economic Advisors, Changing America: Indicators of Social Well-Being by Race and Hispanic Origin[R], 1998, pp.33-39.
[49] EEOC Charge Statistic, at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/charges.html.
[50] Office of Management and Budget, Provisional Guidance on the Implementation of the1997 Standard for Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity 6-7 (12/15/00).
[51] United States Census Bureau, Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 2000, at 9 (2001), http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-206.pdf.
[52] Immigrant Labor Force in U.S. Up Sharply, Chicago Tribune, Sept. 4, 2000, available at 2000 WL 3704780.
[53] Pyong Gap Min, Ethnicity: Concepts, Theories, and Trends, in Struggle for Ethnic Identity: Narratives by Asian American Professionals[A], pp16, 18 (Pyong Gap Min & Rose Kim eds., 1999).
[54] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p.232.
[55] U.S. Census Bureau, Age by Language Spoken at Home by Ability to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over: Census 2000[R], http://factfinder.census.gov/ servlet/DTTable?ds_name=D&geo_id=D&mt_name=ACS_C2SS_EST_G2000_P035&_lang=en.
[56] Mari J. Matsuda, Voices of America: Accent, Antidiscrimination Law, and a Jurisprudence for the Last Reconstruction[J], 100 Yale Law Journal 1329, 1384-85 (1991).
[57] U.S. Department of Commerce, 1960, Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population; Vol. I[R].
[58] U.S. Department of Commerce, 1993, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1993[R], Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Census, p. 426.
[59] Samuel Estreicher, Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, p.420.
[60] Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (1976)[Z], p1062.
[61] (台)焦兴铠.美国两性工作平等制度之研究[A].载焦兴铠主编.欧美两性工作平等制度之比较研究[C].台北:“中研院欧美所”,1996.95-96.
[62] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 1988, p. 249.
[63] Bennett Capers, Sex(ual Orientation) and Title VII[J], Columbia Law Review, Vol. 91, (1991), pp. 1158-1166.
[64] Jeffrey S. Byrne, Affirmative Action for Lesbians and Gay Men: A Proposal for True Equality of Opportunity and Workforce Diversity[J], 11 Yale Law and Poly. Review, 47, 63 (1993).
[65] George Rutherglen, From Race to Age: The Expanding Scope of Employment Discrimination Law[J], The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2. (Jun., 1995), pp.491-521.
[66] John J. Donohue III & Peter Siegelman, The Changing Nature of EmploymentDiscrimination Litigation[J], 43 Stanford Law Review 983 (1991).
[67] Michael J. Zimmer et al., Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business 2000, p.720.
[68] National Research Council, Ending Mandatory Retirement For Tenured Faculty: The Consequences for Higher Education[M], (P.B. Hammond & H.P. Morgan eds. 1991).
[69] Michael C. Harper, Age-Based Exit Incentives, Coercion, and the Prospective Waiver of ADEA Rights: The Failure of the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act[J], 79 Va. L. Rev. 1271 (1993).
[70] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedures to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy (Fall, 2001),p.151.
[71] Michael D. Moberly, Letting Katz out of the Bag: The Employer’s Duty to Accommodate Perceived Disabilities[J], Arizona State Law Journal, Vol. 30, Fall, 1998, p. 608.
[72] Jean Ruth Schroedel, Employer Attitude Towards Hiring Persons with Disabilities, 1978, quoting in Samuel Estreicher & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group, 2000, pp.515-16.
[73] Deborah Kaplan, Employment Rights: History, Trends and Status, in Law Reform in Disability Rights[R], Vol. 2 (Berkeley: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, 1981), p. E-4.
[74] Steven F. Stuhlbarg, Comment,“Reasonable Accommodation Under the Americans with Disabilities: How March Must One Do Before Hardship Turns Undue?”[J], University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 59, (1991), p.1311.
[75] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109 (May, 1996), p.1610.
[76] Gregory Scolieri & Matthew H. Woodard, A Call for Clarification: Achieving A Uniform Proof Structure in Reasonable Accommodation Cases Under the Americans with Disabilities Act[J], Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal, Vol.20, No. (Fall, 2002).pp.146-147.
[77] Development in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (May, 1996), p.1608.
[78] Gregory Scolieri & Matthew H. Woodard, A Call for Clarification: Achieving A Uniform Proof Structure in Reasonable Accommodation Cases Under the Americans with Disabilities Act[J], Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal, Vol.20, (Fall, 2002).pp.117-152.
[79] Linda Hamilton Krieger, The Content of Our Categories: A Cognitive Bias Approach to Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity[J], Stanford Law Review, Vol. 47, No. 6. (July, 1995), pp.1187-1188.
[80] Nadine Taub, Keeping Women in Their Place: Stereotyping Per Se as a Form of Discrimination[J], Boston College Law Review, Vol. 21, (1980), pp.353-354.
[81] Rebecca Hanner White, De Minimis Discrimination[J], Emory Law Journal, Vol. 47, (1998), pp.1148-1151. See also Ernest F. Lidge III, The Meaning of Discrimination: Why Courts Have Erred in Requiring Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs to Prove that the Employer’s Action Was Materially Adverse or Ultimate[J], 47 Kansas Law Review, 333 (1999); Theresa M. Beiner, Do Reindeer Games Count as Terms, Conditions or Privileges of Employment Under Title VII?[J], 37 Boston College Law Review, 643 (1996).
[82] Kevin W. Williams, The Reasonable Accommodation Difference: The Effect of Applying the Burden Shifting Frameworks Developed Under Title VII in Disparate Treatment Cases to Claims Brought Under Title I of the Americans with Discrimination Act[J], Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, Vol. 18, (1997), pp.103-104.
[83] Developments in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (1996), pp.1589-1590.
[84] Jason Long, Advocating“Pretext Plus”: The Impact of Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. on the Shifting Evidentiary Burden Framework[J], 51 Kansas Law Review, 629 (2003).
[85] William R. Corbett, The“Fall”of Summers, The Rise of“Pretext-Plus”, and the Escalating Subordination of Federal Employment Discrimination Law to Employer at Will: Lessons from McKennon and Hicks[J], 30 Georgia Law Review, 305 (Winter, 1996).
[86] Mark S. Brodin, The Demise of Circumstantial Proof in Employment Discrimination Litigation: St. Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, Pretext, and the“Personality”Excuse[J], 18 Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 98, (1997).
[87] David J. Turek, Affirming Ambiguity: Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. and the Burden-Shifting Framework of Disparate Treatment Cases[J], 85 Marquette Law Review, 283 (Fall, 2001).
[88] The Civil Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb., 1993), p.896.
[89] Recent Cases: Employment Law– Discrimination– Ninth Circuit Finds for Employee in a Mixed-Motive Case Without“Direct Evidence”of Discrimination– Costa v. Desert Palace, Inc., 299 F.3d 838 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc), cert. granted, 123 S.Ct. 816 (2003)[J], 116 Harvard Law Review, 1897 (2003).
[90] Michael Abbott, A Swing and a Miss: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Attempt to Resolve the Confusion over the Proper Evidence Burden for Employment Discrimination Litigation inCosta v. Desert Palace[J], Iowa the Journal of Corporation Law, Vol. 30, (2005), pp.573-591.
[91] Brian W. McKay, Mixed Motives Mix-Up: The Ninth Circuit Evades the Direct Evidence Requirement in Disparate Treatment Cases[J], 38 Tulsa Law Review, (2003), pp.503, 505-518.
[92] Kelly Pierce, A Fire Without Smoke: The Elimination of the Direct Evidence Requirement For Mixed-Motive Employment Discrimination Cases in Costa v. Desert Palace[J], 87 Minnesota Law Review, 2173, 2078-2209 (June, 2003).
[93] Ramona L. Paetzold & Steven L. Willborn, The Statistics of Discrimination (1994 & 1998 supp.), pp.29-30, quoting in Samuel Estreicher & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination and Employment Law[M], West Group (2000), p.111.
[94] Douglas Laycock, Statistical Proof and Theories of Discrimination, Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986)[R], p.104.
[95] Kingsley R. Browne, Statistical Proof of Discrimination: Beyond“Damned Lies”[J], 68 Washington Law Review, 477 (1993).
[96] Norris, A Structural Approach to Evaluation of Multiple Regression Analysis as Used to Prove Employment Discrimination: The Plaintiff’s Answer to Defense Attacks of“Missing Factors”and“Pre-Act Discrimination”[J] , Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986), p.65.
[97] Sujata S. Menjoge, Testing the Limits of Anti-discrimination Law: How Employer’Use of Pre-employment Psychological and Personality Tests Can Circumvent Title VII and the ADA[J], 82 North Carolina Law Review, 326, 360 (December, 2003).
[98] Elaine Shoben, Differential Pass-Fail Rates in Employment Testing: Statistical Proof Under Title VII[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 91, 793, 805-811 (1978).
[99] Sumner H. Slichter, James J. Healy & E. Robert Livernash, The Impact of Collective Bargaining on Management[M], (1960), pp.104-106.
[100] George Loewenstein & Nachum Sicherman, Do Workers Prefer Increasing Wage Profiles?[J], Journal of Labor and Economics, 67, 77-80 (1989).
[101] Zimmer, et al, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, pp.474-475.
[102] Mark Brodin, Role of Fault and Motive in Defining Discrimination: The Seniority Question Under Title VII[M], 62 North Carolina Law Review, 943 (1984).
[103] Blumrosen, Strangers in Paradise: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. and the Concept ofEmployment Discrimination[J], 71 Michigan Law Review, 59 (1972).
[104] David Benjamin Oppenheimer, Negligent Discrimination[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 141, No. 3. (Jan. 1993), pp. 899-972.
[105] David Benjamin Oppenheimer, Negligent Discrimination[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 141, No. 3. (Jan. 1993), pp. 899, 927.
[106] Notes, The Civil Rights Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb. 1993), p.896.
[107] John J. Donohue III & Peter Siegelman, The Changing Nature of Employment Discrimination Litigation[J], 43 Stanford Law Review, 983, 998 n.57 (1991).
[108] Michele A. Estrin, Note, Retroactive Application of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to Pending Cases[J], 90 Michigan Law Review, 2035, 2036 n.8 (1992).
[109] Andrew C. Spiropoulos, Defining the Business Necessity Defense to the Disparate Impact Cause of Action: Finding the Golden Mean[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 1479, 1516-1520 (1996).
[110] Julia Lamber, Alternative to Challenge Employee Selection Criteria[J], 1985 Wisconsin Law Review, 1 (1985).
[111] Douglas Laycock, Statistical Proof and Theories of Discrimination[J], Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 49, No. 4, Federal Regulation of Work from Recruitment to Retirement. (Autumn, 1986), p.99.
[112] George Rutherglen, Disparate Impact under Title VII: An Objective Theory of Discrimination[J], Virginia Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 7. (Oct. 1987), p.1331.
[113] Elaine Shoben, Differential Pass-Fail Rates in Employment Testing: Statistical Proof Under Title VII, 91 Harvard Law Review, 793 (1978). See also Dean Booth & James L. Mackay, Legal Constraints on Employment Testing and Evolving Trends in the Law[J], 29 Emory Law Journal, 121 (1980).
[114] Ramona L. Paetzold & Steven L. Willborn, Deconstructing Disparate Impact: A View of the Model Through New Lenses[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 325, 356 (1995).
[115] Michael J. Zimmer, Individual Disparate Impact Law: On the Plain Meaning of the 1991 Civil Rights Act[J], 30 Loy. U. Chi. L.J 473 (1998).
[116] Business Necessity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: A No-Alternative Approach[J], The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 84, No. 1. (Nov. 1974), p.98.
[117] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.913.
[118] Fiss, A Theory of Fair Employment Laws[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol.38, No.2. (Winter, 1971), p.239.
[119] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.913.
[120] Fiss, A Theory of Fair Employment Laws[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Winter, 1971), pp.235-258.
[121] Id. at 241.
[122] Marcus B. Chandler, The Business Necessity Defense to Disparate-Impact Liability under Title VII[J], The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 4. (Summer, 1979), p.916-17.
[123] Andrew C. Spiropoulos, Difining the Business Necessity Defense to the Disparate Impact Cause of Action: Finding the Golden Mean[J], 74 North Carolina Law Review, 1479, 1485 (1995).
[124] Linda Lye, Comment, Title VII, Tangled Tale: The Erosion and Confusion of Disparate Impact and the Business Necessity Defense[J], 19 Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 315 (1998).
[125] Dean Booth & James L. Mackay, Legal Constraints on Employment Testing and Evolving Trends in the Law[J], 29 Emory Law Journal, 121 (1980).
[126] Patricia Cain Smith & L.M. Kendall, Retranslation of Expectations: An Approach to the Construction of Unambiguous Anchors for Rating Scales[J], 47 Journal of Applied Psychology, 149-155 (1963); and Richard Campbell, Marvin D. Dunnette, Richard D. Arvey & Lowell V. Hellervik, The Development and Evaluation of Behaviorally Based Rating Scales[J], 57 Journal of Applied Psychology, 15-22 (1973).
[127] American Society for Personnel Administration, A Professional and Legal Analysis of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Criteria[R], 163-164 (1981).
[128] Elizabeth Bartholet, Application of Title VII to Jobs in High Places[J], 95 Harvard Law Review, 947, 987-989, (1982).
[129] Sharona Hoffman, Preplacement Examinations and Job-Relatedness: How to Enhance Privacy and Diminish Discrimination in the Workplace[J], 49 Kansas Law Review, 517, 538 (2001).
[130] Harry Wessel, Personality Tests Grow Popular; Increasingly, They Are Being Used in Hiring[N], Seattle Times, Aug. 3, 2002, at G1, available at 2003 WL 3544069.
[131] Kimberli R. Black, Personality Screening in Employment[J], 32 American Business Law Journal, 69 (1994).
[132] Stephen F. Befort, Pre-Employment Screening and Investigation: Navigating Between aRock and a Hard Place[J], 14 Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal, 367-368 (1997).
[133] Susan J. Stabile, The Use of Personality Tests As a Hiring Tool: Is the Benefit Worth the Cost?[J], 4 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 281-282 (2002).
[134] Sujata S. Menjoge,Comment: Testing the Limits of Anti-discrimination Law: How Employers’Use of Pre-employment Psychological and Personality Tests Can Circumvent Title VII and the ADA[J], 82 North Carolina Law Review, 328-329 (2003).
[135] Susan G. Clark, Interviewing Job Applicants: Asking the Right Questions[J], 128 Education Law Report, 939, 941-942 (1998).
[136] Soroka v. Dayton Hudson Corp., 1 Cal. Rptr. 2d 77 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991), rev. dismissed, 862 P. 2d 148 (Cal. 1993).
[137]李薇薇,Lisa Stearns .禁止就业歧视:国际标准和国内实践[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.50-51.
[138] Note, Rethinking Weber: The Business Response to Affirmative Action[J], 102 Harvard Law Review 658 (1989); Anne B. Fisher, Businessmen Like to Hire by the Numbers[J], Fortune (Sept. 16, 1985), at 26.
[139] Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[M], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.103.
[140] Herman Belz, Equality Transformed: A Quarter-Century of Affirmative Action[M]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991, p.15-16.
[141] Lester C. Thurow, The Zero Sum Socity, (1980), pp.188-189, quoting in Zimmer, et al., Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, pp.472-473.
[142] [美]约翰·罗尔斯著.姚大志译.作为公平的正义——正义新论[M].上海:上海三联书店,2002. 70.
[143] Ehrenberg, Ronald, & Robert S. Smith, Modern Labor Economics[M], 4th ed. New York: Harper Collins. 1991. p.534.
[144] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.信春鹰,吴玉章译.认真对待权利[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998. 299-302.
[145] Eric Schnapper, The Varieties of Numerical Remedies[J], 39 Stanford Law Review, 851 (1987).
[146] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), pp.13-14.
[147] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of ItsLegislative Intent by the Supreme Court[J], Akron Law Review, Vol. 29, No. 2. (Winter, 1996), pp.294-295.
[148] Christopher Mellevoid, Patterson v. McLean Credit Union: Denying the Equality of Effect in the Right to Contract[J], 11 Pace Law Review 411, 420-421, (1991).
[149] Van den Hagg, Ernest, Jews and Negroes[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.390.
[150] Christopher McCrudden, Merit Principles[J], Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4. (Winter, 1998), p.547.
[151] Lamont, The Concept of Desert in Distributive Justice[J], Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 174. (1994), pp.45-46.
[152] Christopher McCrudden, Merit Principles[J], Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4. (Winter, 1998), p.543.
[153] Richard Fallon, To Each According to His Ability, From None According to His Race: The Concept of Merit in the Law of Antidiscrimination[J], 60 Boston University Law Review 815, (1980).
[154] Randall Kennedy, Persuasion and Distrust[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.51.
[155] James N. Baron, Organizational Perspectives on Stratification[J], 10 Annual Review of Sociology 37. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review, Inc., 1984.
[156] Paul Burstein, Affirmative Action, Jobs, and American Democracy: What Has Happened to the Quest for Equal Opportunity?[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 26, No. 4. (1992), pp.912-913.
[157] James R. Kluegel, Trends in Whites’Explanation of the Black-White Gap in Socioeconomic Status, 1977-1989[J], 55 American Sociological Review, 1991, p.517.
[158] Linda Hamilton Krieger, Civil Rights Perestroika: Intergroup Relations After Affirmative Action[J], 86 California Law Review, (1998), pp.1331-1332.
[159] Thomas Sowell, Are Quotas Good for Black?[A], in Russell Nieli, ed., Racial Preference and Racial Justice: The New Affirmative Action Controversy[C], Washington, D.C.: Ethics & Public Policy Center, 1991, p.419.
[160] Herman Belz, Equality Transformed: A Quarter-Century of Affirmative Action[M]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991, pp.68-109, 207-234.
[161] William A. Gamson, & Andre Modigliani, The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action[J], 3Research in Political Sociology 137. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1987.
[162] Paul Burstein, Discrimination, Jobs and Politics. Chicago[M]: University of Chicago Press, 1985.
[163] Robert R. Alford, & Roger Friedland, Powers of Theory[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985; Robert A. Dahl, A Preface to Democratic Theory[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1956.
[164] Paul Burstein, Affirmative Action, Jobs, and American Democracy: What Has Happened to the Quest for Equal Opportunity?[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 26, No. 4. (1992), p.916.
[165] [美]罗纳德·德沃金著.信春鹰,吴玉章译.认真对待权利[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998. 295.
[166] James J. Heckman & Brook S. Payner, Determining the Impact of Federal Antidiscrimination Policy on the Economic Status of Blacks: A Study of South Carolina[J], 79 American Economics Review, 138 (1989).
[167] James E. Jones, Jr., The Origin of Affirmative Action[J], 21 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 395 (1988).
[168] Charles R. Lawrence III, The Id, The Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning With Unconscious Racism[J], 39 Stanford Law Review 317 (1987).
[169] Eric Schnapper, The Varieties of Numerical Remedies[J], Stanford Law Review, Vol. 39, (1987), p.851.
[170] Samuel Estreicher, & Michael C. Harper, Cases and Material on Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Group, 2000, pp.257-258.
[171] Kathleen Sullivan, Sins of Discrimination: Last Term’s Affirmative Action Cases[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 100, (1986), p.78.
[172] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of Its Legislative Intent by the Supreme Court[A], quoting in Kermit L. Hall, Freedom and Equality: Discrimination and the Supreme Court[C], Garland Publishing, Inc., 2000, p.25. See also, United Steelworkers v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 61 L.Ed.2d 480 (1979).
[173] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), pp.14-15.
[174] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law[M], West Publishing Co., 2000, p.316.
[175] Notes, The Civil Rights Act of 1991: The Business Necessity Standard[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 4. (Feb., 1993), p.900.
[176] John J. Donohue III, Employment Discrimination Law in Perspective: Three Concepts of Equality[J], Michigan Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 8, Symposium: Visions of Equality: TheFuture of Title VII. (Aug., 1994), pp.2585-2586.
[177] Michael J. Zimmer, Taxman: Affirmative Action Dodges Five Bullets[J], 1 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 229 (1998).
[178] Barbara Lindemann Schlei, & Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law[M], The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1976, pp.740-741.
[179] Carmen G. Slominski & Hazel M. Willacy, Back Pay and Extra-Judicial Proceedings: Is the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs Exceeding Its Authority?[J], 41 Ohio State Law Journal, 401 (1980).
[180] Donald P. Judges, Light Beams and Particle Dreams: Rethinking the Individual vs. Group Rights Paradigm in Affirmative Action[J], 44 Arkansas Law Review, 1007 (1991).
[181] Marshall J. Walthew, Affirmative Action and the Remedial Scope of Title VII: Procedural Answers to Substantive Questions[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 136, No. 2. (Dec., 1987), pp.625-654.
[182] Carl E. Brody, Jr., A Historical Review of Affirmative Action and the Interpretation of Its Legislative Intent by the Supreme Court[A], in Kermit L. Hall ed., Freedom and Equality: Discrimination and the Supreme Court[C], Garland Publishing, Inc., 2000, p.35.
[183] David A. Strauss, Affirmative Action and the Public Interest[J], The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1995. (1995), p.22.
[184] David Strauss, The Myth of Colorblindness[J], The Supreme Court Review,Vol. 1986. (1986), pp.100-113.
[185] Christine Jolls, Antidiscrimination and Accommodation[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 115, No. 2. (Dec., 2001), pp.697-699.
[186] Note, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Present Operation and Proposals for Improvement[J], 5 Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problem I, (1969), pp.16-17.
[187] Berg, Equal Employment Opportunity Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964[J], 31 Brooklyn Law Review, (1966), pp.64-68. and Vaas, Title VII: Legislative History[J], 7 B.C. Ind. & Com. L. Rev. (1966), p.431.
[188] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[189] Roy L. Brooks, A Roadmap Through Title VII’s Procedural and Remedial Labyrinth[J], 24 Southwestern University Law Review, 511 (1995).
[190] Jim Beall, Note, The Charge-Filing Requirement of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Accrual and Equitable Modification[J], 91 Michigan Law Review, 798 (1993).
[191] Douglas A. Laycock, Continuing Violations, Disparate Impact in Compensation and Other Title VII Issues[J], 49 Law and Contemporary Problems, (Autumn, 1986), pp.58-60.
[192] Laurie M. Stegman, Note, An Administrative Battle of the Forms: The EEOC’s Intake Questionnaire and Charge of Discrimination[J], 91 Michigan Law Review 124 (1992).
[193] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedures to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), p.146.
[194] Matt A. Mayer, The Use of Mediation in Employment Discrimination Cases[J], 1999 Journal of Dispute Resolution, (1999), pp.153-159.
[195] Julie Harders, Too Good To Last?[J], Aba Journal, (April, 2000), p.30.
[196] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[197] Michael R. Triplett, Study Shows High Satisfaction Levels With EEOC’s Voluntary Mediation ProgramProcedure[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA) No. 189, (Sept. 28, 2000), at A-6.
[198] Michael A. Szkodzinski, An Analysis of the EEOC’s Issuance of Early Right-to-Sue Letters: Does It Promote Judicial Efficiency or Encourage Administrative Incompetence?[J], University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 150, No. 2. (Dec., 2001), pp. 689-717.
[199] N. Morrison Torrey, Indirect Discrimination Under Title VII: Expanding Male Standing to Sue for Injuries Received as a Result of Employer Discrimination Against Females[J], 64 Washington Law Review, (1989), p.365.
[200] Jonathan R. Macey & Geoffrey P. Miller, The Plaintiffs’Attorney’s Role in Class Action and Derivative Litigation: Economic Analysis and Recommendations for Reform[J], University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 58, (1991), p.1.
[201] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[202] Michael J. Zimmer, et al, Cases and Materials on Employment Discrimination[M], Aspen Law & Business, 2000, p.1011.
[203] Mark S. Kende, Deconstructing Constructive Discharge: The Misapplication of Constructive Discharge Standard in Employment Discrimination Remedies[J], 71 Notre Dame Law Review, 39 (1995).
[204] Mack A. Player, Employment Discrimination Law, West Publishing Co., 2000, p.450.
[205] Nancy Montwieler, EEO Case Filings Said "Leveling Off," But Still a Large Share of Caseload[N], Daily Labor. Report. (BNA) No. 58, at A-1 (Mar. 24, 2000).
[206] Employment Bias Cases in Federal Courts Almost Tripled in Previous Decade, DOJ Says[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA) No. 13, at E-5 (Jan. 20, 2000).
[207] Lauren B. Edelman; Howard S. Erlanger; John Lande, Internal Dispute Resolution: The Transformation of Civil Rights in the Workplace[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 27, No. 3. (1993), pp.502-503.
[208] Carrie Menkel-Meadow, Toward Another View of Legal Negotiation: The Structure of Problem-solving[J], 31 UCLA Law Review, (1984), p.754.
[209] David Luban, The Quality of Justice[J], 66 Denver University Law Review, (1989), p.381.
[210] Bush, Robert A. Baruch, Defining Quality in Dispute Resolution: Taxonomies and Anti-Taxonomies of Quality Arguments[J], 66 Denver University Law Review, (1989), p.335.
[211] Peter Adler, Karen Lovaas, & Neal Milner: The Ideologies of Mediation: The Movement’s Own Story[J], 10 Law & Policy, (1988), p.317.
[212] Richard Hofrichter, Neighborhood Justice in Capitalist Society: The Expansion of the Informal State[M], New York: Greenwood Press, 1987, p.132.
[213] Stewart Macaulay, Private Government, in L. Lipson & S. Wheeler, eds., Law and the Social Sciences[M], New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1986.
[214] Patricia A. Gwartney-Gibbs; Denise H. Lach, Gender and Workplace Resolution: A Conceptual and Theoretical Model[J], Law & Society Review, Vol. 28, No. 2. (1994), pp.265-296.
[215] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Charge Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006; and EEOC Litigation Statistics, FY 1997 Through FY 2006[R], at http://www.eeoc.gov/stats.html.
[216] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.144-145.
[217] Lauren B. Edelman, Stephen Petterson, Elizabeth Chambliss, & Howard S. Erlanger, Legal Ambiguity and the Politics of Compliance: Affirmative Action Officers’Dilemma[J], 13 Law & Policy, (1991), p.73.
[218] Barbara A. Gutek, Disputes and Dispute-Processing in Organizations[J], 12 Studies in Law, Politics & Society, (1992), p.31.
[219] Yesheskel Hasenfeld, Jane A. Rafferty, & Mayer N. Zald, The Welfare State, Citizenship, and Bureaucratic Encounters[J], 13 Annual Review of Sociology, (1987), p.387.
[220] Arnold M. Zack, The Alliance for Education in Dispute Resolution: Leveling the PlayingField in Employment Mediation[J], 2 J. Alternative Dispute Resolution In Employment, 31 (Issue 2, Summer 2000).
[221] Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.149-150.
[222] Charles B. Craver, Effective Legal Negotiation and Settlement[M], (4th ed. 2001), pp.458-466, quoting in Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.148-149.
[223] Stephen B. Goldberg & Jeanne M. Brett, An Experiment in the Mediation of Grievances[J], 106 Monthly Labor Review, No. 3, (Mar. 1983), at 23.
[224] Development in the Law: Employment Discrimination[J], Harvard Law Review, Vol. 109, (1996), p.1670.
[225] Hai Jiang, Do We Allow Contract Law to Administer Civil Rights Remedies? Casenote on Haskins v. Prudenial Insurance Co.[J], 2003 Law Review of Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, (2003), p.251.
[226] Hope B. Eastman & David M. Rothenstein, The Fate of Mandatory Employment Arbitration Amidst Growing Opposition: A Call for Common Ground[J], 20 Employee Relation Law Journal, (1995), p.595.
[227] Thomas J. Piskorski & David B. Ross, Private Arbitration as the Exclusive Means of Resolving Employment-Related Disputes[J], 19 Employee Relation Law Journal, (1993), p.209; and Irving R. Kaufman, Reform for a System in Crisis: Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal Courts[J], 59 Fordham Law Review I, (1990), p.2-3.
[228] ADR Technique Gaining Favor in Non-Traditional Settings[N], Daily Labor Report (BNA), No. 48, at C-1, (Mar. 15, 1993).
[229] Stephen L. Hayford & Michael J. Evers, The Interaction Between the Employment-At-Will Doctrine and Employer-Employee Agreements to Arbitrate Statutory Fair Employment Practices Claims: Difficult Choices for At-Will Employer[J], 73 North Carolina Law Review, (1995), p.494.
[230] Evan J. Spelfogel, Legal and Practical Implications of ADR and Arbitration in Employment Disputes[J], 11 Hofstra Labor Law Journal, (1993), p.269.
[231] Lisa B. Bingham, On Repeat Players, Adhesive Contracts, and the Use of Statistics in Judicial Review of Employment Arbitration Awards[J], 29 McGeorge Law Review, (1998), p.223.
[232] Monica J. Washington, Note, Compulsory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Disputes: Judicial Review Without Judicial Reformation[J], 74 New York University Law Review, (1999), p.844.
[233] Geraldine Szott Moohr, Arbitration and the Goals of Employment Discrimination Law[J], 56 Washington & Lee Law Review, (1999), p.395.
[234] Scott M. Nelson, The Proposed Civil Rights Procedures Protection Act: An Unlikely End to Mandatory Employee Arbitration Agreements?[J], 2 J. Alternative Dispute Resolution In Employment, (Summer 2000), p.19.
[235] Eduard A. Lopez, Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Discrimination Claims: Some Alternative Grounds for Lai, Duffield and Rosenberg[J], 4 Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, (2000), pp.3-4.
[236] Marlin M. Volz & Edward P. Goggin, How Arbitration Works[M], (5th ed. 1997), pp.142-143, quoting in Charles B. Craver, The Use of Non-Judicial Procedure to Resolve Employment Discrimination Claims[J], 11 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, (Fall, 2001), pp.157-158.
[237] Michael Picher, Ronald L. Seeber & David B. Lipsky, The Arbitration Profession in Transition[M], pp.8-9 (2000).
[238] Kenneth R. Davis, A Model for Arbitration: Autonomy, Cooperation, and Curtailment of State Power[J], 26 Fordham Urban Law Journal, (1999), p.167.
[239] Leona Green, Mandatory Arbitration of Statutory Employment Disputes: A Public Policy Issue in Need of a Legislation Solution[J], 12 Notre Dame Journal of Legal Ethics & Public Policy, (1998), p.173.