Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979)

Read a random definition: penal custody

A quick definition of United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979):

United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979) is a court case where the Supreme Court said that it's okay for companies to have programs that try to hire more minorities who were historically excluded from certain jobs. This is called affirmative action. The case was about a company that agreed to hire more black workers until they had the same number of black workers as the local labor market. A white worker sued because he wasn't hired even though he had more seniority than some of the black workers who were hired. The Supreme Court said that the company's program was okay because it was voluntary and because Congress didn't say that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination in the workplace, couldn't allow affirmative action programs.

A more thorough explanation:

United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979) is a U.S. Supreme Court case that dealt with affirmative action programs in the workplace. The Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination in the workplace, does not prohibit voluntary affirmative action programs that seek to hire minorities who were historically underrepresented.

For example, in this case, the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) and Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation entered into a collective-bargaining agreement which provided that Kaiser would fill 50 percent of craftworker trainee positions by black workers until the proportion of black workers at Kaiser mirrored the local labor market pursuant to the Title VII affirmative action provision. Previously, black workers had been unable to enter Kaiser’s craftwork force because black workers lacked craftwork experience from being historically excluded from craft unions. A white worker, Weber, was not selected even though he had greater seniority than many of the black workers selected for trainee positions. Weber sued USWA and Kaiser for violating Title VII for discriminating against white workers.

The Supreme Court ruled that voluntary affirmative action hiring programs that seek to increase minority worker participation in industries which historically excluded minority workers do not violate Title VII. While Title VII prohibits racial discrimination regardless of which race the aggrieved person belongs to, the Court reasoned that the legislative history of Title VII showed a special focus for ensuring black workers can secure jobs in industries they were historically excluded from. Additionally, Congress specifically stated that Title VII does not require employers to adopt such affirmative action plans, so if they meant Title VII to prohibit the voluntary adoption of such plans, it would have explicitly legislated so.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark | universal life insurance

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
Dkk
19:42
SEO is big money
2016 pushed the conservative party into populism irreversibly
Dkk
19:43
Maybe, but if this is populism, then every election is populist.
19:43
@Dkk: yeah register 1 website and every swinging tom dick and harry calls/emails/texts to 'help with seo'. like bruh, if YOU found it, what i am doing is working
Dkk
19:43
Indeed!
19:48
wasp, i think people are hopeful for a gov who at least attempts to care about the common man
MIAMI A
[] AromaticTroubledDormouse
20:55
How does one know if they are UR1 or UR2?
[] AromaticTroubledDormouse
20:56
CONGRATS MACAQUE!
TY
got a random stanford email and almost had a heart attack
ALSO CONGRATS!
Congrats1!
21:15
Miami A, yall I'm so excited I could cry.
21:15
Feel like I can finally stop holding my breath!! Whew!!!
[] baddestbunny
22:16
every time I get accosted by a strange man who follows me around because my male coworkers were too busy talking to walk me back to my car I get closer to saying we need to bring back traditional gender roles
Dkk
22:32
Nice! @Macaque
Dkk
22:32
@Aromatic, Have to guess.
Dkk
22:33
That sucks @Bunny do you have to go to the hospital?
[] baddestbunny
22:40
I said accosted not assaulted
23:35
guys. my notre dame address just went long is this good or bad
1a2b3c4d26z
23:37
Oooooo me too
23:37
omg is this good or bad
Dkk
23:47
Idk if gender roles are gunna fix that then.
23:49
it looks like most people who applied in october last cycle didn't get a decision until january... does it even mean anything that our addresses went long??
hows ED 2 compared to ED 1?
Dkk
0:10
No idea
windyMagician
0:34
reporting live to say my ndls address also went long
does it mean anything ^
Dkk
2:21
NDLS and Fordham took a very long time last year. It's good info for people to know.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.