Employment Law Information Network
Google
 
Web www.elinfonet.com
Main Navigation
Federal Law Articles
State Law Articles
HR Newsletter
HR Guidebook
HR Policy
HR Seminars
Employment Contracts
Employment Law Forums
Employment Law Blog
Employment Laws
Employee Rights
Workplace Headlines
Federal Article Feeds Federal Article Feeds
State Article Feeds State Article Feeds
Get Our FREE Daily or Weekly Newsletter!
Email:
Over 8,300 Subscribers! More Information
Back to Case List
Case Name

Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc. (U.S. 2006)

Articles mentioning case law

 United States Supreme Court Holds Plant Manager’s Occasional Reference to African American Employees as "Boy" Potentially Probative of Discriminatory Intent (pdf).

Phelps Dunbar LLP - May 16, 2006
Two African American employees filed suit under Title VII and Section 1981, alleging race discrimination arising from nonpromotions. The plaintiffs were superintendents at a Tyson Foods owned and operated poultry plant. They had sought promotions to fill the two shift manager positions, but two white males had been selected. Plaintiffs then filed suit in the Northern District of Alabama. The jury returned a verdict for both plaintiffs.
 Supreme Court Rejects "Slap You in the Face" Standard for Evaluating Qualifications Evidence in Discrimination Cases.
Ford & Harrison LLP - March 02, 2006
In a significant employment related decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Eleventh Circuit used an improperly vague standard in evaluating the evidence in a race discrimination case. Accordingly, the Court ordered the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider the evidence using a more precise standard. See Ash v. Tyson Foods Inc. (Feb. 21, 2006). The Court also held that the Eleventh Circuit was wrong when it held that a supervisor's use of the term "boy" in referring to the two African American employees who sued Tyson Foods was not evidence of discrimination because it was not modified by a racial classification.
 Context Counts: The Word "Boy" May Be a Racial Epithet At Work.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. - February 24, 2006
In a brief unanimous opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled on February 21, 2006 in Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc. that the word "boy" without any words modifying it, can be a racial epithet depending on the context, inflection, tone of voice, local custom, and historical usage.
Quick Links
Lawyers for Employers
Lawyers for Employees
Employment Law Cases
Most Popular Articles
Most Recent Articles
Hot Topics - Federal
Hot Topics - State
Job Search
Submit Your Articles
Affiliate Firm Login

Powered by JustAnswer
Find A Lawyer
For Employee
For Employer

City:

County:


Employment Law Seminars
Employment Law 101 for HR Professionals
Las Vegas
March 23, 2010

Fisher & Phillips

California Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To Comply
Newport Beach
March 23, 2010

Fisher & Phillips

California Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To Comply
San Francisco
March 23, 2010

Fisher & Phillips

2010 Public Sexual Harassment Training for supervisors and managers.
Glendale
March 23, 2010

Ballard Rosenberg

2010 Employment Law Update
San Jose
March 23, 2010

Littler

How to Prepare a Response to a DFEH/EEOC Charge
Webinar
March 23, 2010

Shaw Valenza

TOP 10 TIPS FOR CREATING A BLOGGING, SOCIAL MEDIA AND CELL PHONE POLICY
Online
March 23, 2010

HR Learning Center LLC

Negotiating Your Business to the Top
Orlando
March 23, 2010

Ford & Harrison

California Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late To Comply
San Diego
March 24, 2010

Fisher & Phillips

Employment Law Breakfast Briefings`
Kenner
March 24, 2010

Fisher & Phillips


Terms of Use  |  Privacy  |  Advertising  |  About  |  Contact  |  For Law Firms  |  Partners

Copyright © 2010 elinfonet.com, llc.
All Rights Reserved.

The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.

This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations.  As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law.  None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice.  The information should not be relied upon for legal advice.  We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created.  Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege.  If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area.  If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association.

All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners.