Bush and Senate Settle Differences on Civil Rights in Sex-Discrimination Suits, Burden of Proof Would Return to Employer, Caps Would Be Set

By Laurent Belsie, writer of The Christian Science Monitor | The Christian Science Monitor, October 28, 1991 | Go to article overview

Bush and Senate Settle Differences on Civil Rights in Sex-Discrimination Suits, Burden of Proof Would Return to Employer, Caps Would Be Set


Laurent Belsie, writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor


AFTER nibbling away at affirmative action for the last few years, the United States is on the verge of enacting new civil rights protections for women and minorities.

Senate Democrats and the White House have reached a compromise that, if passed, would represent a major step. The compromise bill would:

*Sweep away provisions of recent Supreme Court decisions that have made discrimination suits harder to win. Instead, the bill would codify an earlier and easier test of discrimination.

*Allow victims of intentional sex discrimination to sue for compensatory and punitive damages up to certain limits. Currently, they can sue only for back pay, restoration of seniority, and an injunction against further discrimination.

*Prohibit "race-norming the practice of adjusting employment-related test scores by group. Instead of hiring the top 10 applicants, for example, businesses using race-norming could hire the top 10 whites, top 10 blacks, and top 10 Hispanics.

Legal experts hailed the proposed language.

"This has got to be treated as a significant advance," said Rod Boggs, executive director of the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights.

In a rare display of collaboration, Senate Democrats and Republicans cheered and hoped the compromise would move rapidly through the House.

"We've restored the nation's bipartisan consensus on civil rights," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts. "This is the next great milestone toward achieving equal justice in our society and removing race and sex discrimination from the workplace."

"It's a joyous day," President Bush said Friday, adding that he would sign such legislation enthusiastically. A year ago, Bush vetoed similar civil-rights legislation, saying it would force businesses to resort to racial quotas to avoid discrimination suits.

"We have a civil rights bill," Bush said. "It's not a quota bill."

Some business groups are skeptical.

"We have not seen the details of the compromise, but based on what we know so far, we are gravely disappointed," said William Archey, senior vice president for policy with the US Chamber of Commerce.

The National Federation of Independent Business, the nation's largest small-business group, was more direct in its response: "This bill will make businesses sitting ducks for capricious lawsuits."

While the proposed legislation increases the potential damages in sex-discrimination suits, it also imposes caps on those damages. Maximum damages are $50,000 for businesses with 16 to 100 employees; $100,000 for businesses with 101 to 200 employees; $200,000 for companies with 201 to 500 workers; and $300,000 for firms with more than 500. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Bush and Senate Settle Differences on Civil Rights in Sex-Discrimination Suits, Burden of Proof Would Return to Employer, Caps Would Be Set
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.