翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ "O" Is for Outlaw
・ "O"-Jung.Ban.Hap.
・ "Ode-to-Napoleon" hexachord
・ "Oh Yeah!" Live
・ "Our Contemporary" regional art exhibition (Leningrad, 1975)
・ "P" Is for Peril
・ "Pimpernel" Smith
・ "Polish death camp" controversy
・ "Pro knigi" ("About books")
・ "Prosopa" Greek Television Awards
・ "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen
・ "Q" Is for Quarry
・ "R" Is for Ricochet
・ "R" The King (2016 film)
・ "Rags" Ragland
・ ! (album)
・ ! (disambiguation)
・ !!
・ !!!
・ !!! (album)
・ !!Destroy-Oh-Boy!!
・ !Action Pact!
・ !Arriba! La Pachanga
・ !Hero
・ !Hero (album)
・ !Kung language
・ !Oka Tokat
・ !PAUS3
・ !T.O.O.H.!
・ !Women Art Revolution


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores : ウィキペディア英語版
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores

''Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores'', , is United States Supreme Court case regarding a Muslim-American woman, Samantha Elauf, who was refused a job at Abercrombie & Fitch in 2008 because she wore a head scarf, which conflicted with the company's dress code. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled 8-1 in Elauf's favor on June 1, 2015.
== Background ==
In 2008, Elauf, then 17 years old, applied for a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch store in Tulsa, Oklahoma. During her interview with the company, she was wearing a head scarf, but did not say why.〔 The woman interviewing her, Heather Cooke, was initially impressed with Elauf, but also concerned about her head scarf. Cooke had told the manager of the store that she thought Elauf was wearing the scarf for religious reasons, but the manager responded that employees were not allowed to wear hats at work, and so declined to hire her.
In 2009, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Abercrombie & Fitch on Elauf's behalf. This led to a lawsuit in a federal district court that resulted in Elauf receiving $20,000 in damages. However, this decision was later reversed by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of Abercrombie & Fitch on the basis that Elauf did not provide the company with information about her need for an accommodation.〔

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.