Facebook
Home Civil Page 6

Civil

Study Says Pay Gap Starts Early

Study Says Pay Gap Starts Early

Introduction

The American Association of University Women has recently released a study that suggests that the gender pay gap starts early in women’s careers, often before they even enter the workforce. This finding is significant as it highlights the need for action to address this issue at a young age.

Background on the Gender Pay Gap

The gender pay gap has been a contentious issue for decades, with women earning less than their male counterparts for doing the same job. It is a complex issue with many contributing factors, including discrimination, lack of access to education and training, and societal expectations.

Study Findings

The American Association of University Women’s study found that women’s earnings are impacted by a variety of factors early in their careers, including the major they choose in college, their first job out of college, and the amount of student debt they carry. Women’s earnings are also affected by the gender pay gap that exists in their chosen field.

Implications for Women in the Workforce

The findings of this study have significant implications for women in the workforce, suggesting that they are already at a disadvantage when they first start their careers. This means that the gender pay gap is not just a problem for women in mid-career or later, but is an issue that affects women from the beginning of their working lives.

Action Needed

In light of these findings, it is crucial that action is taken to address the gender pay gap. This includes efforts to eliminate discrimination in the workplace, increasing access to education and training, and supporting women in their careers. Employers can also take steps to ensure that they are paying their employees fairly and without regard to gender.

Conclusion

The study by the American Association of University Women highlights the need for action to address the gender pay gap, which starts early in women’s careers. It is crucial that efforts are made to eliminate discrimination and support women in their careers, as well as increasing access to education and training. Addressing the gender pay gap is not just a women’s issue, it is an issue that affects us all and requires a coordinated effort to solve.

The topic of a gender pay gap is hotly contested at the national political level.  Recently, the Paycheck Fairness Act was championed by Democrats in the House and Senate, but was opposed by Republicans and eventually blocked.  According to a recent study by the American Association of University Women, the pay gap is still a problem—and it starts earlier than most people think.

According to the AAUW’s study, women are paid significantly less than men as soon as one year after college graduation.  While some opponents of paycheck fairness legislation have argued that this gap is due to a difference in professions for men and women, the study shows that this is not the case.

While in some professional fields—like education, math, biology, humanities, and healthcare—men and women were paid about the same, in others the difference was marked.  While a male graduate of an engineering program can expect to make about $55,000 a year after graduation, his female counterpart would make around $48,500.

Similarly, male business majors earned about $7,000 more than female business majors, and another $7,000 gap in favor of men existed in the social sciences.  The starkest contrast was in the field of computer and information sciences.  Women in that field can expect to make just $39,000 a year after graduating from college.  Men make over $51,000—a difference of $12,000 that studies indicate becomes even bigger as men and women continue in the workforce.

The study shows a difference in women’s wages that cannot be explained by maternity leave or childcare responsibilities.  Because the survey was taken just a year after graduation, it is also not affected as much by differing requests for raises.

One of the most significant impacts of this pay difference, according to the AAUW, is that university educated women have more difficulty than men in paying their federal student loans.  Women’s paychecks take a bigger hit from loans, and more women default on their student loans than men.

The fields that have the most significant pay difference for women are also the fields that tend to attract the fewest women, suggesting that institutional discrimination in salary and job advancement may be contributing to women’s lower rates of entry into those majors.

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, passed into law in 2009, allows American women greater ability to sue employers who are paying people less based on their gender.  This legislation has prompted a new look at creating new laws that can help women get a fair shake in the workplace.

Sources: eeoc.gov, aauw.org, house.gov

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Explained

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Explained

Civil Rights Act of 1964 Explained:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a revolutionary piece of legislation in the United States that effectively outlawed egregious forms of discrimination against African Americans and women, including all forms of segregation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 terminated unequal application in regards to voter registration requirements and all forms of racial segregation in schools, in the workplace and by facilities that offered services to the general public.

When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was initially enacted, the powers given to enforce the act were relatively weak; however, the authoritative abilities were later supplemented during the years following the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Congress asserted its ability to enforce the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to legislate the stipulations of the legislation through different parts of the United States Constitution, primarily the ability to regulate interstate commerce under Article One, the duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection laws under the Fourteenth Amendment and the duty to protect voting rights for all citizens under the Fifth Amendment.

Origins of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was instituted by President John F. Kennedy during his civil rights speech of June 11, 1963, where he asked for legislation, which would give all Americans the right to be served in public facilities.

The bill’s origin emulated the Civil Rights Act of 1875; however, Kennedy’s agenda included provisions to ban all forms of discrimination in public areas while enabling the United States Attorney General to join in lawsuits against all state governments which operated or encouraged the formation of segregated schools.

Major Features of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 barred unequal application of voter registration requirements. Although this provision required that all voting rules and procedures be uniform regardless of race, it did not eliminate literacy tests, which was the predominant method used to exclude African American voters.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This particular provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination in motels, hotels, theatres, restaurants and all other public accommodations which were engaged in interstate commerce.

Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Outlawed state and municipal governments from barring access to public facilities based off an individual’s religion, gender, race, or ethnicity.

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Provision that discouraged the desegregation of public schools and enabled the United States Attorney General to initiate suits to enforce said act.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prevented discrimination by government agencies who received federal funds. If an agency violates this particular provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 will lose its federal funding.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This fundamental provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination by employers on the basis of color, race, sex, national origin, or religion.

What is the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended racial segregation and outlawed most forms of discrimination in the workplace, schools, public facilities and separate requirements based on racialized distinctions, such as discriminatory voter registration requirements.  The Civil Rights Act also clarified some of the rights of women.

Where does the authority lie in the federal enforcement of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The federal government derives the power to enforce the provisions of the Civil Rights Act through:

– Article One, Section 8 – The interstate commerce clause as means of enforcing laws and regulations between two states.

– Fourteenth Amendment – federal duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection under the law.

– Fifteenth Amendment – federal duty to protect voting rights.

What are the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The provisions of the Civil Rights Act include:

– Public accommodations may not discriminate against or segregate individuals based on race, ethnicity of gender.

o Public accommodations being any establishments that lease, rent or sell goods and provide services.  Additionally if the establishment is public gathering place, educational institution, park or lodging enterprises.

– School systems may no longer segregate students

o Could face federal lawsuit for non-compliance

– A ban on racial discrimination in employment

– Protections for minority voters

These provisions are applied in the following order in the text of the Civil Rights Act

Title I – Rules and procedures regarding voting must be uniform for all races.

o This did not explicitly ban forms of traditional voter suppression, such as literacy tests

Title II – Public accommodations such as lodging, restaurants and theatres may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin

Title III – Explicitly prohibits state and local governments from discrimination based on race, religion color or national origin in public facilities

Title IV – Provides for the federal enforcement of desegregating public schools

Title V – Empowers the Civil Rights Commission to further investigate and act on allegations of discrimination

Title VI – Prohibits discrimination by federal agencies when providing services or administration.  Violating agencies can lose funding and face judicial review

Title VII – Bans discrimination by employers on the basis of race, religion, color, sex or national origin.  It also added for protections for individuals associated with other races, such as an interracial marriage.

o Protection did not apply to Communist organizations or persons with Communist affiliations

o Allows for limited discrimination on the part of the employer if they can conclusively prove that the employees’ gender would impair him or her from conducting the job properly.

Title VIII – Created a record of voter registration and date for use by the Commission on Civil Rights

Title IX – Moved civil rights trials with all white juries or segregationist judges to federal courts for a fair trial.

Title X – Establish Community Relations Services to investigate discrimination in community disputes

Title XI – Established harsher penalties for violating the Civil Rights Act

Civil Rights Act and gender

Due to the provisions of the Civil Rights Act, several court cases prevented discrimination against women in the workplace.  For instance, the Supreme Court rules that women with preschool age children could not be banned from employment unless the establishment maintained the same rules for male employees.  Similarly, a lower federal court struck down an Ohio law that created a separate class of employment for women that placed limitations on the amount of lifting they could do and enforced mandatory lunch breaks.  This made them less attractive as potential hires than male employees.  Other cases ended gender-specific job postings and discriminatory tools such as height requirements that would have barred most women from certain professions.

Federal vs. States

The federal government, by nature of its role as the regulator of relations and commerce between states enforces anti-discrimination law on business establishments.  Anti-discrimination precedent usually originates in federal courts overturning state decisions and laws.  Immediately after the establishment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, there arose several state challenges to the law, especially desegregation, which sometime meant the use of federal troops to enforce federal court decisions.

What is the legacy of the Civil Rights Act?

Today, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigates complaints of discrimination and violations of the rights of employees.  This has gradually expanded to the rights of immigrants and guest workers as they face the newest wave of discrimination in the workplace.  The US government recognizes potential forms of discrimination to include intimidation, threats of deportment, withholding of wages and violations of Acts that proceeded after the Civil Rights Act that guaranteed pregnancy leave, fair wages and protection for individuals with disabilities.

Timeline of Important Events and Cases

(1964) Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States 

Supreme Court rules that the federal government can force businesses to abide by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through the Interstate Commerce Clause in the Constitution.  Owner of the motel had argued that the federal government overstepped its authority and violated the 5th amendment that allowed him to operate his business as he pleased.  He also claimed a violation of due process and “involuntary servitude” for being mandated to rent rooms to African Americans.

The court found that the refusal to rent accommodations to African American travels was a disruption to interstate commerce and the federal government maintained the right to regulate businesses, within reason, regardless of the 5th amendment

(1964) Katzenbach v. McClung

This case also applied to interstate commerce as much of the food purchased at McClung’s restaurant crossed state lines, due to the nearby highway.  The Supreme Court upheld the right to the federal government to desegregate restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

(1974) Griggs v. Duke Power Co

The Supreme Court ruled that restriction on promotions at the Duke Power Company were inherently biased toward African American workers and was not relevant to the position.  The restrictions were found to be in place for the sole purpose of promoting white workers.  The lack of rationale for restricting the promotion of employees with low IQ and no high school diploma as well as the requirement’s roots in racial segregation constituted a violation of equal protection.  The courts determined that the requirements were unfair as African Americans had received inferior education up until desegregation only a few years earlier.

(1976) Washington v. Davis

This case dealt with two African Americans that had been rejected for positions in the Washington DC police department on the basis of a verbal skills assessment that overwhelmingly disqualified many African American applicants.  The Court ruled against this claim noting the efforts of the police department to recruit minority officers, the proportion of white officers and African American officers and that while the test had been disqualifying potential applicants, it purpose was not discriminatory in nature.  The court further ruled that:
“Racial discrimination by the state must contain two elements: a racially disproportionate impact and discriminatory motivation on the part of the state actor.”

(1982) Chrapliwy v. Uniroyal

Uniroyal found to have maintained segregated hiring and seniority system for women by the US Court of Appeals 7th Circuit.  Led to a successful class-action lawsuit.

(1989) Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio

Non-white workers brought suit against the employer for failing to promote non-white workers to management despite their strong presence in the labor jobs of the company.  The Supreme Court ruled that when deciding if a company’s hiring was discriminatory, the available market for the type of labor must be assessed and not the racial composition of the company itself.

(2009) Ricci v. DeStefano

A group of firefighters brought suit against the city of New Haven, Connecticut for invalidating a test that would have earned them promotions.  The city feared a disparate impact if the results of the test meant that all African American firefighters that took the test failed.  The other firefighters claimed that this was a form of racial discrimination.  The Supreme Court ruled this a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Introduction

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is landmark legislation that is considered one of the most significant bills in American history. The Act made discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal and helped to shape the civil rights movement. In this article, we will explain the key features of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Background

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced in response to a growing civil rights movement in the United States. The bill was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964. The Act is considered one of the most important pieces of legislation in American history and helped to establish the foundation for the modern civil rights movement.

Title I: Voting Rights

Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory voting practices, including poll taxes and literacy tests, which were often used to prevent African Americans from voting. The Act also established federal oversight of elections in certain areas of the country.

Title II: Public Accommodations

Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. This title of the Act applies to restaurants, hotels, theaters, and other public places.

Title III: Desegregation of Public Facilities

Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires desegregation of public facilities such as schools, parks, and libraries. This title of the Act aimed to end segregation in all public spaces and ensure equal access to public facilities for all Americans.

Title IV: School Desegregation

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 established the Equal Educational Opportunities Act, which provided federal funding for schools to promote equal access to education for all students, regardless of their race or ethnicity.

Title VI: Federal Assistance

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity that receives federal funding. This title of the Act applies to schools, hospitals, and other institutions that receive federal funding.

Title VII: Employment Discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This title of the Act applies to employers with more than 15 employees and provides protections for employees from discrimination in hiring, firing, promotions, and other areas of employment.

Conclusion

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark piece of legislation that helped to shape the civil rights movement in the United States. The Act made discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal and established important protections for individuals in areas such as voting, education, and employment. While there is still work to be done to achieve true equality in the United States, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a major step forward in the fight for civil rights and social justice.

All You Need to Know About Civil Service

All You Need to Know About Civil Service

Civil Service Defined

The definition of the term Civil Service is considered to maintain two separate and individual meanings and implications. On one hand, Civil Service may refer to the hiring process latent within the realm of employment; on the other hand, Civil Service – in conjunction to departments of Civil Services – may represent the classification given to individuals employed by a government or ruling body.

Civil Service Hiring Practices

Employment practices with regard to the protocol set forth by a methodology of Civil Service are conducted in terms of designating and mandating the hiring of prospective governmental employees in conjunction with the implementation of an examination or test substantiating the ability latent within an applicant:

Civil Service exams institute the structuring of employment-based hierarchy with regard to both the grade of pay, as well as occupational responsibility in accordance to the results of individual Civil Service examinations; these examinations are oftentimes referred to through the usage of the catchall colloquialism ‘Civil Service Exams’

The subject matter present on Civil Service examinations is liable for adjustment as per the evolution of inherent job requirements and job responsibilities

What are Civil Services?

The definition of Civil Service that does not involve the merit-based substantiation of governmental employment is commonly classified in accordance with its corollary catchall term – Civil Services. The classification of Civil Services will typically vary on a locational basis; while certain governmental departments belonging to certain countries or nations may be classified as Civil Services, those same classifications may not be applicable in peripheral nations.

Civil Service in the United States of America

Although the specification of Civil Services varies on the basis of country and gubernatorial structure, employment classified as Civil Services positions within the United States are largely classified as governmental employees, which typically excludes the United States Military; however, some individuals may unofficially categorize certain classifications of the United States Military as Civil Services – the classification is rarely uniform. Yet, the following governmental departments within the United States of America are officially recognized as Civil Services:

Executive Civil Services

The President of the United States

The Whitehouse Staff

The National Security Administration

The Office of Drug Control Policy

The Office of Science and Technologies

The Office of Veteran Affairs

The Department of Defense

The Department of Homeland Security

The Department of Treasury

The Department of Justice

The Department of Commerce

The Department of Education

The Department of Labor

The State Department

The Department of Energy

The Department of Housing and Development

The Department of Health and Human Services

The Department of the Interior

Independent Civil Services

The United States Postal Service

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration

The Central Intelligence Agency

The Environmental Protection Agency

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Office of Personnel Management

The Small Business Administration

The Social Security Administration

United States Civil Service Commission

In 1883 – following the assassination of President James A. Garfield, which occurred at the hands of Charles Guiteau – legislative reform was enacted with regard to the appointment and hiring processes regarding Civil Service employment. Charles Guiteau was rejected from his attempt to be employed under a Civil Service position under the Presidency of James Garfield; in response, he shot and killed President Garfield as a means of punishment for his rejected application. The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act enforced the following:

Civil Service examinations were required by all applicants

Civil Service employees were prohibited from the appointment, as well as the termination mandated by elected officials; the tactic was enacted in order to prevent similar recourse undertaken by Charles Guiteau

Proposed Ontario Leave Cut Leaves Lady Lawyers in Lurch

Proposed Ontario Leave Cut Leaves Lady Lawyers in Lurch

Introduction

Proposed changes to a parental leave program used by hundreds of attorneys in Ontario may leave pregnant attorneys with limited options for continuing their legal practice. The changes are being proposed as a cost-saving measure by the Ontario Law Society and have caused concern among many lawyers who rely on the program. Here’s what you need to know about the issue.

Background

The Law Society of Ontario introduced a parental leave assistance program for lawyers in 2017. The program, which provides financial assistance to lawyers going on parental leave, has been used by hundreds of attorneys, particularly women, to help them maintain their legal practice while caring for a new child. The proposed changes would see the funding for the program cut significantly, leaving many lawyers without the support they need.

Impact on Women Lawyers

Critics of the proposed changes argue that they will disproportionately impact women lawyers, who are more likely to take parental leave than their male counterparts. They assert that the changes will make it difficult for women to maintain their legal practice and return to work after having a child. Lawyers who have relied on the program in the past are concerned about how they will continue to practice law without the support provided by the program.

Cost-Saving Measures

The Law Society of Ontario has proposed the changes as a cost-saving measure to address a projected budget shortfall. The organization has stated that it will explore other options to support lawyers on parental leave, but critics argue that the proposed cuts will have a significant impact on the legal profession, particularly for women lawyers.

Call for Action

As lawyers and advocates voice their concerns about the proposed changes, the Law Society of Ontario is expected to hold a debate on the issue this week. Lawyers are calling for the organization to reconsider the changes and to maintain the support provided by the parental leave program. They argue that the changes will not only have a negative impact on individual lawyers but will also harm the legal profession as a whole.

Conclusion

The proposed changes to the parental leave assistance program in Ontario have caused concern among lawyers, particularly women, who rely on the support provided by the program. Critics argue that the changes will limit the options available to lawyers on parental leave and will have a negative impact on the legal profession. As the Law Society of Ontario debates the proposed changes, many are calling for the organization to maintain the support provided by the program and to explore other options to address budget concerns.

A cut to a parental leave program that hundreds of attorneys—most of them women—have depended on for three years may leave some pregnant attorneys without options for continuing their legal practice.  The changes, proposed as a cost savings measure by the Ontario Law Society, will be debated later this week.

The Ontario Law Society licenses attorneys and provides services to attorneys in the Canadian province of Ontario the same way that state bar associations do in the United States.  Three years ago, it began a pilot program to give parental leave to new parents who were trying to juggle their parental responsibilities with their professional ones.

The program, which cost about half a million dollars per year, was designed to supplement the income of attorneys taking parental leave as solo practitioners or while working for small firms.  Larger firms often have ad hoc maternity leave policies or relatively new policies that allow attorneys to continue being paid for several months after giving birth.  However, smaller firms generally cannot afford to give this kind of maternity benefit, and solo practitioners may lack the funds to simply not take clients for a few months while they recover from labor.

The province of Ontario does have special benefits that can pay up to $450 per week during parental leave, this is often not enough for attorneys to continue to pay office rents.  If the $750 a week program through the Ontario Law Society is discontinued, the unemployment insurance $450 per week maximum may be the best that many solo practitioners and small firm attorneys can do.

Ontario’s law society chose to implement the parental leave program after noticing that while women made up 50 percent of the graduating class of Ontario’s law schools, after 8 years in the profession they were only 35 percent.  Women at small firms, according to the law society, are likely to stop working when they are unable to go back to work for several months after giving birth, because they are unable to continue billing clients and lack family friendly flexibility.

Currently, people who are deriving benefits from the policy typically take about 12 weeks total of paid leave.  While men are allowed to receive parental leave benefits, women have been far more likely to use the program and constitute the vast majority of its recipients to date.

In order to use the program, attorneys must demonstrate that they work at a firm with five lawyers or fewer, that they are becoming a birth or adoptive parent, and that they are unable to obtain any other type of paid leave.  They must also stop doing any legal work during the time that they are receiving the parental leave benefit, in order to prevent attorneys from simply having the benefit paid out in addition to salary for several weeks.

Sources: lsuc.on.ca, theglobeandmail.com

Kansas-Nebraska Act

Kansas-Nebraska Act

KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT TEXT

What was the the Kansas-Nebraska Act ?

The Kansas-Nebraska Act was a bill, originally proposed in 1854 by Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas that split the American territories west of Missouri into two factions, the Nebraska territory and the Kansas territory.  In the Kansas-Nebraska Act the two territories were to decide for themselves, through poplar sovereignty whether to permit slavery or not.  

The territory of Kansas comprised the land west of the Missouri border to the summit of the Rocky Mountains in what are now the States of Kansas and most of Colorado.  The territory of Nebraska consisted of the area north of Kansas to the Canadian border and west to the great divide. 

Background

Since the 1840’s the idea of a transcontinental railroad were becoming more and more prosperous to the United States.  Senator Stephen Douglas, partly to aid his constituents in Illinois and partly to garner support for a presidential run, wished to have the transcontinental railroad travel through Illinois; having its hub in Chicago. 

In order to make this happen the transcontinental railroad would have to take a northern route, putting it through, what was then, the Nebraska Territory.  His proposal was to organize the territory of Nebraska to bring it under civil control and populate the area which was, at this point in time, frontier land subject to attacks by Native Americans.  In Douglas’s view, manifest destiny required the removal of those members of the population who were deemed to be deviant and violent, meaning Native Americans.  The way to accomplish this goal was to create an incentive for individuals to establish communities and drive out the former inhabitants.

The proposal did not fare well among the southern population.  The southern States argued that The Missouri Compromise of 1820 outlawed slavery above the 36th latitude and therefore the Nebraska Territory would become a free territory.  

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 came about over the admission of Maine and Missouri as States in the Union.  After debate in Congress it was decided that Maine would be admitted as a Free State and Missouri a slave State.  In addition it was ruled that the slavery issue in all other territories west of Missouri would be decided on a geographic level.  All those lands north of the 36th parallel would be Free States and that south of that line would be slaves States.  The Missouri Compromise was amended in 1850 with the annexation of Texas.  The revised version, The Missouri Compromise of 1850 would make California a free State, Texas a slave State and the slaver issue in Utah and New Mexico territories would be decided by popular sovereignty.  

For fear that the territories would eventually become States and ultimately create an imbalance in Congress over the slavery issue, the south argued against the Act.  In order to quell southern dissent, and garner support for the bill, Douglas proposed a compromise.  

The compromise entailed the division of the Nebraska Territory into two distinct territories, the Nebraska Territory and the Kansas Territory.  In both territories the settlers were to vote on whether they would allow slavery in the territory.  Although it was never repealed, the Act ignored parameters of The Missouri Compromise of 1820 and helped bring the Civil War closer than ever.

Results of the Kansas-Nebraska Act

Immediate Results

Upon the Kansas-Nebraska Act’s enactment in May of 1854 it was already highly controversial and condemned by the Northern States.  It was considered a complete affront to the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and was considered a betrayal by their own Senator.  The Kansas-Nebraska Act was also condemned by northerners because there was never a question as to whether the Nebraska Territory, before the Kansas-Nebraska Act, would become a free or slave territory.  Most of the territory was situated so far north that even the need for slaves was lacking.  Aside from the part of the territory that now comprises Nebraska and Kansas, there was little thought that the area would become a highly intense agricultural area demanding the use of slave labor.

The response to the Kansas-Nebraska act was nothing more than a rush to settle the Kansas Territory.  Where the decision on slavery was going to come to a popular vote, it was important for both the North and the South to settle the territory as much as possible to insure favorable results.  

First election in Kansas

In a rush to settle the Kansas Territory, northerners from New England and other anti-slavery areas began to rush into the territory to settle the region.  A group of anti-slavery activists estimated at 1200 individuals entered Kansas in July of 1854 and established the city of Lawrence which was to be the focal point of the anti-slavery movement in Kansas.  

Upon hearing of the influx of up to 20,000 northern ant-slavery supporters into Kansas a surge of individuals from the southern States began to converge on the territory.  In November of 1854 thousands of southerners, mostly from the Missouri border just to the east, converged on Kansas, armed with firearms in an attempt to vote on slavery’s behalf.  This resulted in almost half of the votes that were cast in the territorial election of 1854 being cast by those who were actual resident.  The vote resulted in pro-slavery advocates having won the election.  However, because of the blatant and obvious voter fraud associated with the election, the results were nullified and another election was held.

A second election was held in March of 1855; again pro slavery forces from Missouri and other southern states infiltrated the territory.  Some estimates have stated that between 3000 to 6000 individuals stormed the Kansas Territory to vote for the pro-slavery agenda.  The pro-slavery vote won the second election as well and the territory began to establish itself as pro-slavery.

Upon the victory of the pro-slavery faction in the election of 1855 the First Kansas Territorial Legislature enacted a number of laws, commonly known as the bogus laws.  These laws were highly discriminatory towards anti-slavery persons living within the Kansas Territory.  

The “bogus laws”, as they were called because northerners felt that they had; and rightly so, stolen the election, adopted the statutes of Missouri as the law in Kansas.  The Kansas Territorial Legislature also adopted what are known as the “black laws.” The black laws were enacted in order to “punish offenses against slave property.” The “offenses” included: aiding or assisting decoying a slave punishable, by death; raising or insurrection among slaves, punishable by death; printing or publishing any document calculated to produce “dangerous disaffection” among slaves, punishable by 5 years of hard labor; and even speaking or writing about the condemnation of slavery, punishable by 2 years of hard labor.

Bleeding Kansas

The result of the establishment of the Kansas Territory as a pro-slavery territory combined with the enactment of the “bogus laws” resulted in a powder keg of violence.  In May of 1856 a group of 800 men attacked the pro-slavery capitol of Lawrence, Kansas.  The mob burned buildings, destroyed the newspaper offices and In May 1856, an 800-man “posse” made up of border ruffians from Missouri sacked Lawrence, wrecking the newspaper offices and the Governor’s residence.  In response the abolitionist, John Brown; who would be immortalized in the Harpers Ferry massacre, and four of his sons abducted five pro-slavery settlers and murdered them within the view of their families.  Overall, the ongoing skirmishes associated with “bleeding Kansas” resulted in the deaths of 200 individuals.  

In Congress there was the same amount of civility.  The Kansas problem had caused anger between the representatives of both sides and after one speech given by Senator Charles Sumner, where he ridiculed southern congressmen of cavorting with “the harlot, slavery”, was bludgeoned with a cane by Congressman Preston Brooks.

Lincoln Douglas Debates of 1858

In the infamous Lincoln Douglas debates of 1858, which propelled Lincoln to the presidency, the issue of slavery was the main topic at hand.  Lincoln used the example of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the resulting “bleeding Kansas” as stepping stone to stress the point about the spread of slavery.  Where Lincoln did not condemn slavery, at least not vocally at this point, he did take not to mention, with “bleeding Kansas” as an example, that the idea of slavery is so strong in the ideals of those who want it that they will go to far reaches to insure it dominion.  Lincoln noted that slavery must be checked because otherwise it would encompass the entire country.

Kansas as a Free State

Due to the overwhelming violence and obvious voter fraud associated with the Kansas-Nebraska Act the decision was finally made to admit Kansas as Free State in the Union.  The pro-slavery faction of Congress condemned the decision claiming, among other things, that it went against the elections that were held to decide the matter.  Congress stalled and Kansas was not admitted to the Union until 1861 when the southern States began to secede from the Union.

To read the Kansas-Nebraska Act please go to https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=28&page=transcript

The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854: A Controversial Piece of Legislation

The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was a piece of legislation that allowed for the creation of two new territories, Kansas and Nebraska, by dividing the land of the Louisiana Purchase into two parts. While this may have seemed like a simple and straightforward action, it ended up being one of the most controversial pieces of legislation in American history. In this article, we will take a closer look at the Kansas-Nebraska Act and its impact on American history.

The Need for New Territories

At the time, the United States was expanding westward. The Louisiana Purchase, made in 1803, had vastly expanded America’s territory, but as more and more people moved west, it became clear that new territories were needed. This need was especially urgent after the discovery of gold in California in 1848, which led to a rush of settlers heading west in search of riches.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act

The Kansas-Nebraska Act was introduced by Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois in January 1854. Douglas was a strong advocate of popular sovereignty, the idea that the settlers of a new territory should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery within their borders. The act proposed that the issue of slavery in the new territories be decided by popular sovereignty.

The act was not without controversy. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 had prohibited slavery in any new territories north of latitude 36°30′, but the Kansas-Nebraska Act would repeal this compromise. This was seen as a betrayal by many in the North, who felt that their interests were being ignored in favor of the interests of the South.

Bleeding Kansas

The passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act led to a rush of settlers heading west to stake their claim to the new territory. However, things quickly turned violent in Kansas, with pro- and anti-slavery settlers clashing in what became known as “Bleeding Kansas.” The violence included raids, arson, and even outright fighting between the two factions.

The impact of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was far-reaching. It helped to further inflame tensions between the North and South over the issue of slavery, ultimately leading to the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861. The act also effectively destroyed the Democratic Party, which had been the dominant political force in the country up to that point.

Conclusion

While the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 may have seemed like a simple piece of legislation at the time, its impact on American history cannot be overstated. It helped to bring the issue of slavery to the forefront of national politics, ultimately leading to the outbreak of the Civil War. It is a reminder of the power of legislation and how even seemingly small actions can have far-reaching consequences.

 

Sexual Harassment Plaintiffs’ Facebook Passwords Handed Over to Defendant

Sexual Harassment Plaintiffs' Facebook Passwords Handed Over to Defendant

Introduction

A recent ruling in a sexual harassment case against the Honeybaked Ham Company has raised concerns among legal experts. The judge ordered the plaintiffs to hand over their social media logins and passwords, as well as access to all text messages, to the defendant for use in trial. Here’s what you need to know about this decision.

Background

The case involves 20 plaintiffs who allege that they were victims of sexual harassment and retaliation while working for the Honeybaked Ham Company. During discovery, the defendant requested access to the plaintiffs’ social media accounts and text messages, arguing that the information could be relevant to the case.

The Ruling

In a surprising decision, the judge ordered the plaintiffs to provide their social media logins and passwords to the defense, along with access to all text messages. The judge noted that social media and text messages could contain relevant evidence and that the plaintiffs had not presented any privacy concerns that outweighed the relevance of the information.

Legal Implications

The decision has raised concerns among legal experts, who worry that it could set a dangerous precedent for privacy rights in future cases. Some argue that social media and text messages are private forms of communication that should be protected from being used in court without a compelling reason. Others argue that this ruling could open the floodgates to defendants seeking access to private information in all types of cases.

Protecting Your Privacy

If you are involved in a legal case, it is important to be aware of the potential for your social media and text messages to be used as evidence. To protect your privacy, consider setting your social media and text message accounts to private and deleting any potentially incriminating messages.

Conclusion

The ruling in the Honeybaked Ham Company case has sparked a debate about the balance between privacy rights and the need for relevant evidence in legal cases. As the use of social media and technology becomes more prevalent, it is important for individuals to be aware of their rights and take steps to protect their privacy.

A judge’s decision in a sexual harassment case against the Honeybaked Ham Company is sending shockwaves through the legal community—and the trial hasn’t even begun yet.  The case, which is still in the discovery phase, took an interesting twist this week when a judge ruled that the 20 plaintiffs would be required to give their social media logins and passwords, as well as access to all of their text messages, to the defendant to use during the trial.

Honeybaked Ham was sued in 2011 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after several women working in its Colorado locations claimed that they had been repeatedly sexually harassed by men working in the stores.  According to the women, they had been called gender-based epithets that had been offensive to them, and had been repeatedly touched or groped by men in the workplace.

The plaintiffs brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace gender discrimination.  They alleged that the conduct of the men working at Honeybaked Ham had constituted both harassment and discrimination, and that a hostile workplace environment had been created by the repeated sexually inappropriate conduct.

However, when the women brought suit, Honeybaked Ham fought back, firing some of the women.  When they sued for retaliation as well, Honeybaked Ham began asking for their social media information.

According to attorneys for Honeybaked Ham, the women who sued were alleging discrimination and that they had been damaged emotionally by their termination, but their social media profiles told a different story.  One woman wore a shirt in a Facebook picture that used the same gender based epithet that she claimed had offended her when it was used by one of the other Honeybaked Ham employees.

The attorneys for Honeybaked Ham also maintain that several of the plaintiffs were having “sexually amorous communications” with each other, which they suggest may imply collusion among the plaintiff class.

The judge in the case ruled that because the Facebook information could be relevant to damages, it should be looked into.  According to the judge, since the information would have been made available in the discovery process if it was on a public “Everything About Me” page, there should be no difference between that and things which may have been posted semi-privately or privately on Facebook.

This case will have significant implications for how people are able to use social media in the future.  Attorneys for plaintiffs in sexual harassment lawsuits should make sure that their clients understand the very serious implications of discussing their case on Facebook or via text messages, and how these discussions can have a serious potential impact on their ability to collect damages.

It is very likely that regardless of how the Honeybaked Ham case is decided, an appeal will be forthcoming.  The case is yet another example of how social media is changing the face of the law today, and even changing some of the basic questions being asked in legal cases.

Sources: eeoc.gov, westlaw.com

Virginia May Stop Shackling Pregnant Women in Labor

Virginia May Stop Shackling Pregnant Women in Labor

Virginia May Stop Shackling Pregnant Women in Labor

Shackling in Prison

The use of restraints in prisons has long been a point of controversy, with many arguing that it is cruel and inhumane treatment that can cause long-lasting negative effects on inmates. The situation becomes even more delicate when it comes to pregnant women in labor who are being restrained or shackled.

Current Shackling Practices

Currently, in many prisons and jails, pregnant women are still being subjected to a variety of restraints, even during their labor and delivery. These restraints include leg shackles, waist chains, and handcuffs, which can cause physical discomfort and also potentially be harmful to the health of the mother and child.

A New Rule in Virginia

Recently, Virginia proposed a new rule that would ban the use of restraints on pregnant women during labor and delivery. If this rule is approved, women in Virginia prisons and jails will no longer be shackled during this vulnerable time in their lives. The proposal has been praised by many advocates for women’s rights and the humane treatment of prisoners.

The Debate Around the Issue

The use of restraints on pregnant women has been a point of debate for many years. Supporters of the use of restraints argue that it is a necessary measure to ensure the safety of prison staff and to prevent escapes. However, opponents argue that it is an inhumane and unnecessary practice that can cause serious harm to the mother and child.

The Positive Impact of the New Rule

If Virginia approves the new rule, it will be a significant step forward in the treatment of pregnant women in prisons and jails. It will help to ensure that these women are not subjected to unnecessary and potentially harmful restraints during one of the most vulnerable times in their lives. It will also be a positive step forward in the fight for the humane treatment of prisoners, and in recognizing the unique needs of pregnant women.

Conclusion

The issue of shackling pregnant women in prisons is a serious one, and it is encouraging to see Virginia take steps to address it. If the new rule is approved, it will send a powerful message about the importance of treating prisoners with respect and dignity, and recognizing the unique needs of vulnerable populations. It is a reminder that even small steps can make a significant difference in the quality of life for those who are incarcerated.

Women who are pregnant or delivering a new baby will no longer be shackled or have waist chains applied, if Virginia approves a new set of rules for its prison systems.  Currently, Virginia prisons and jails are using a wide variety of restraints for prisoners that may include leg shackles and waist chains in addition to handcuffs.

While some prisons and jails have used these restraints only for women who are attending doctor’s visits for prenatal care, others have been significantly more severe.  Many women’s rights groups have been outraged by the fact that 33 states still allow women to be shackled even as they are giving birth, in spite of the safety risks this entails.

The new guidelines, if accepted, will require pregnant or birthing women to be unshackled at all times except for when they are being transported from one place to another.  At any time when they are in the hospital giving birth, they would be unrestrained if the guidelines are implemented as they read now.  Only handcuffs would be permitted for restraint of pregnant prisoners at times of transport.

According to opponents of restraints, restrained jail inmates are significantly more likely to miscarry.  Because of the changes to a woman’s balance that occur during pregnancy and the fact that restraints make it more difficult to regain balance, pregnant women are also more likely to suffer from falls when they are restrained.

Even after a woman’s baby has been delivered, leg shackles can actually lead to a significantly higher risk of hemorrhage or blood clots.  The new guidelines have been proposed by Virginia’s Board of Corrections in response to a request for a consistent policy on the shackling of laboring prisoners in the state’s jails.

The Virginia legislature may be voting on a state law that would supercede these rules and would also apply them not only to jails, but also to prisons.  According to the proposed law, additional restraints could be used for a pregnant woman who posed a genuine flight risk.  While this is rare—the vast majority of pregnant women will stay in the hospital even if they are completely unrestrained during labor—if additional restraints were needed, the sheriff’s office or prison official would have to explain why.

Sheriffs in Virginia have so far been opposed to both forms of the new guidelines.  According to the sheriffs, giving information about the shackling of prisoners could potentially compromise their security procedures.

Most pregnant women in Virginia’s jails are serving sentences of less than one year for non-violent offenses.  If the law proposed passes the Virginia legislature and is signed into effect by Virginia’s governor, it will become the 18th state to limit the extent to which pregnant prisoners may be shackled during labor and birth.  Advocates of these laws point to evidence that shows that pregnant women are among the least likely prisoners to be violent toward prison guards or medical professionals.

1...456Page 6 of 6
Facebook

EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©