$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper presents an in-depth analysis of International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agriculture Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al., Petitioners v. Johnson Controls, Inc., a case that was heard before the US Supreme Court. According to the paper, this case involved discrimination against women by the defendant, Johnson Controls. The paper further describes this discrimination while reviewing the decision of the Court. Additionally, the paper considers the unanimous decision of the Court, yet also addresses some of the points on which there was dissent among the justices. The paper also cites previous case law that was used by the Court in rendering this decision. The paper concludes by stating that the decision in this case demonstrated that it was inappropriate for the courts as well as for individual employers to decide whether a woman's reproductive role is more important to herself and her family than her economic role.
From the Paper:"The Supreme Court of the United States, in an opinion delivered by Blackmun and joined by Marshall, Stevens, O'Connor and Souter reversed and remanded the matter for further proceedings. In this case they were concerned with an employer's gender-based fetal-protection policy. The question was whether an employer could exclude a fertile female employee from certain jobs because of its concern for the health of the fetus the woman might conceive. Occupational exposure to lead entails health risks that include the risk of harm to any fetus carried by a woman subjected to such exposure. After eight employees of Johnson Controls in whose battery manufacturing process lead was a primary ingredient, became pregnant while maintaining blood-lead levels in excess of the level that appeared to be the critical level noted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for a woman who was planning to have a family, the employer announced a policy barring all women, except those whose inability to bear children was medically documented, from jobs involving exposure or potential exposure to lead at a level exceeding OSHA standards. Basically the employer in this case had implemented a policy that excluded women who were pregnant..."
Sample of Sources Used:
- Case Law. (2009). Retrieved October 19, 2009, from V/lex Web site: http://vlex.com/vid/aerospace-uaw-intervening-controls-37279868
- International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agriculture Implement Workers of America, UAW, et al., Petitioners v. Johnson Controls, Inc. 499 U.S. 187 (1991).
- Supreme Court Collection. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2009, from Cornell University Law School Web site: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/89-1215.ZS.html
Cite this Analytical Essay:
Fetal-Protection Policy - A Case Analysis (2012, April 29) Retrieved April 04, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/fetal-protection-policy-a-case-analysis-150862/
"Fetal-Protection Policy - A Case Analysis" 29 April 2012. Web. 04 April. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/fetal-protection-policy-a-case-analysis-150862/>