Charges of human immunodeficiency virus discrimination in the workplace: the Americans with Disabilities Act in action

Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to provide persons living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other vulnerable populations with legal means of redress against discrimination, yet virtually nothing is known about how the intended beneficiaries have used these protections. This study aimed to describe the epidemiology of ADA charges alleging employment-related discrimination due to HIV and to investigate the charge-filing behavior of workers with HIV. Using a national database of all HIV discrimination charges filed since the inception of the ADA in 1991, the author described respondent employers, issues in dispute, and outcomes of charges. Next, he used multivariate regression analyses to compare the sociodemographic characteristics of charge filers with those of a nationally representative baseline sample of workers with HIV. Of the 3,520 HIV discrimination charges filed through 1999, 18.0% had merit and 14.1% received monetary compensation. Workers who were female (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, p < 0.01), aged less than 25 years (OR = 0.36, p < 0.01), and aged 25-34 years (OR = 0.77, p < 0.01) filed disproportionately fewer charges. Controlling for underlying rates of discrimination in the baseline population magnified this "underclaiming" among young workers. The findings should help to target dissemination and support activities, designed to help workers take advantage of antidiscrimination protections, at the subgroups of workers who need them most.

Case studies of violations of workers' freedom of association: manufacturing workers

As part of its report "Unfair Advantage: Workers' Freedom of Association in the United States under International Human Rights Standards," Human Rights Watch conducted a series of case studies in a dozen states, covering a variety of industries and employment sectors, analyzing the U.S. experience in the light of both national law and international human rights and labor rights norms. Presented here are the case studies of manufacturing workers.

Workplace stress and bullying: liabilities of the employer

Case Scenario

Iris works in the intensive care unit at Roger Park Hospital. One of her responsibilities is to arrange the rota for staff cover. As a result of the shortage of intensive care nurses locally, she is compelled to use agency nurses and to plead with her colleagues to work additional shifts or overtime. On some occasions she has been close to asking senior management to consider halting admissions and leaving beds empty, because she is unable to arrange cover. She increasingly finds that she is unable to cope with the situation: she is unable to sleep, she is worrying about work when not on duty and feels that she is close to a nervous breakdown. What is the law?

Should you fight it out or walk away?

Consider the repercussions carefully before you take on a legal battle with your employer. It may be better to simply resign and try something new.

Gender-related biases in evaluations of sex discrimination allegations: is perceived threat the key?

Hypotheses derived from defensive attribution theory and social identity theory were tested in 3 laboratory experiments examining the effects of plaintiff and observer gender on perceived threat, plaintiff identification, and sex discrimination. In Study 1, women differentiated plaintiffs on the basis of gender, whereas men did not. Study 2 showed that this bias occurred because employment discrimination was personally threatening to women but not to men. In Study 3, the bias was reversed in a child custody context. As predicted, men found this context to be significantly more threatening than did women and subsequently exhibited a similarity bias. Mediation analyses suggested that responsibility attributions explained most of the variance in discrimination judgments associated with the plaintiff gender by observer gender interactions.

Smoking in the work place: a management perspective

In the past, smoking in the private work place has been a matter left largely to the discretion of individual employees and employers. A recent poll of the nation's largest service and industrial companies indicates a strong employer preference for this noninterventionist approach by which employees work out smoking-related problems among themselves. Nonetheless, approximately eight states and four dozen localities have passed legislation regulating smoking in the private work place, apparently in response to the courts' reluctance to order such restrictions where the employer has undertaken reasonable efforts to accommodate smokers and nonsmokers. While these laws vary widely in their language and specifics, they may pose significant practical and compliance problems for employers. In the following article, the authors examine judicial, legislative, and employer responses to work-place smoking issues and discuss the options of private employers for coping with this problem.