[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Civil liberties of employees (Re: FYB_oss)
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: Civil liberties of employees (Re: FYB_oss)
- From: Bovine Remailer <[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 96 14:36:16 EDT
- Comments: This message did not originate from the address above. It was remailed by an anonymous remailing service. If you have questions or complaints, please direct them to <[email protected]>
- Sender: [email protected]
[Wildly off-topic...]
Michael Froomkin wrote:
...
>...And there's a lot more
>than skimpy outfits at issue, including a refusal to hire men for what are
>allegedly food service jobs (gender may only be a determination of
>employment if it is a bona fide occupational qualfiication, e.g. policing
>the showers in the gym; gender is not a BFOQ for food service jobs.)
Being a "Hooters Girl" is not a typical "allegedly food service"
job. [Because it's an election-year] the EEOC dropped the case,
but not before Tom Hazlett did an *excellent* piece on it in
REASON. _Corporate Rakeovers_, Feb. 1996 p. 66