Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2006. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 96-98).

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

La question des discriminations au travail est aujourd’hui une matière complexe et vivante qui conduit à s’interroger sur l’adéquation des droits spécifiquement consacrés par la législation du travail à la situation vécue par les salaries. La doctrine et la jurisprudence, sur cette question ne cessent d’évoluer. Les points d’interrogation sont nombreux. Qu'est-ce qu'être tenus pour égaux ? Sous quelles conditions juge-t-on que des personnes sont placées dans des situations égales ? Leurs situations doivent être véritablement identiques ? Les mesures d’application générale sont-elles suffisantes afin de répondre aux inégalités ou doit-on prendre en compte la situation individuelle des personnes ? Et si l’on suggère que c’est précisément cette approche individuelle ou réadaptative, le nouveau moteur de la lutte contre les discriminations dont les effets sont à apprécier tant au plan national qu’européen et international, ne doit-on pas se méfier, voyant qu’elle vient souligner les processus de ségrégation plutôt que les éradiquer? Voici des questions dont la réponse résultera indirectement de cette étude. Dans la première partie de cette étude, nous avons examiné le handicap et la santé comme motifs de discrimination interdits. Ainsi, tout d’abord, nous sommes arrivés à l’analyse de la construction sociale du handicap qui, contrairement au modèle médical, déplace le problème loin de la personne et le resitue dans les processus sociaux liés à la diversité des hommes. Nous avons examiné l’obligation législative des aménagements raisonnables en faveur des personnes handicapées et son application par la jurisprudence, les actions positives et leur rôle contre la discrimination sur le handicap ainsi que la justification des différences de traitement fondées sur le handicap. Nous avons étudié la Convention des Nations Unies du 13 décembre 2006 relative aux droits des personnes handicapées qui est devenue le noyau central de la législation et de la politique européenne sur le handicap en soulignant ses nouveautés. En outre, au-delà de la notion de « handicap », nous nous sommes posé la question de savoir si la maladie et l’inaptitude sont en mesure de justifier un licenciement ou si elles constituent causes de discrimination. Il ne semble pas que le législateur européen souhaite de les inclure parmi les raisons interdites de discrimination. En étudiant la législation de protection contre la discrimination fondée sur le handicap nous avons vu qu’elle a apporté des solutions là où la protection contre la discrimination fondée sur l’état de santé n’est pas règlementée. Ensuite, dans la deuxième partie, nous avons examiné la discrimination multiple et nous avons relevé l’inefficacité de la législation européenne et, par conséquence, de la plupart des législations des États membres de l’Union européenne dans la lutte contre elle. Nous avons noté que c’est le système législatif de catégorisation lui-même qu’il convient de contester car il est totalement inadéquat et ne permet pas de reconnaître le sens réel de l’identité des personnes ni, par conséquent, la discrimination fondée sur plus d’un motif qui interagissent entre eux de sorte qu’ils sont complètement indissociables. Sur ce point, nous sommes arrivées à la conclusion que le régime de protection contre la discrimination fondée sur le handicap peut également conduire à des solutions portant sur la reconnaissance de la discrimination multiple et la protection contre celle-ci, grâce à l’approche individuelle et à l’évaluation du contexte qu’il exige. Enfin, cette étude vise à encourager l'introduction du concept de « discrimination multiple » dans la législation, tant de l'Union que des États membres. Cela donnerait une nouvelle impulsion à la lutte contre les discriminations et permettrait de combler le vide législatif existant. / Nowadays, the issue of labour discrimination is a complex and living subject matter that raises questions about the adaptedness of the rights that are specifically protected by labour legislation to the situation experienced by employees. Legal writing and case-law in this field are constantly evolving. In the first part of this study, we have considered disability and health condition as prohibited grounds of discrimination. Thus, we first analyzed the social construction of disability. Indeed, contrary to the medical model, the social one moves the problem away from the individual person and places it in the social processes that are linked to human diversity. We have examined the statutory duty of reasonable accommodation provided to persons with disabilities and its implementation by case-law, positive actions and their role against disability based discrimination as well as the explanation of the differences in treatment based on disability. We have studied the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, of 13 December 2006. This Convention has indeed become the core of European legislation and policy on disability, underlining its innovations. Furthermore, beyond the concept of “disability”, we have considered the issue of whether illness and unfitness are sufficient to justify a termination or if they are grounds of discrimination. The European legislator does not seem eager to include them in the prohibited discrimination grounds. Our study of the legislation that is protecting against discrimination based on disability has led us to conclude that it has brought solutions in cases where protection against discrimination based on health condition is not regulated. The second part of our study is dedicated to the analysis of multiple discrimination. We have highlighted the ineffectiveness of the European legislation and, thus, that of the majority of legislations of the European Union Member States in fighting against it. We have noted that what should be questioned is the legal categorization system itself. Indeed, it is absolutely inappropriate and does not allow to identify the real sense of the persons’ identity or, consequently, to identify discrimination based on more than one grounds that are interacting in such a manner that makes them totally indissociable. On this matter, we have concluded that the protection scheme against discrimination based on disability could also lead to solutions on the issue of identification of multiple discrimination and protection against it, thanks to the individual approach and to the context evaluation it requires. As a last step, the present study aims at supporting the introduction of the concept of “multiple discrimination” both in the European Union legislation and in that of the Member States. This would give a new impulse to the fight against discriminations and would allow to address the existing legislative deficiencies.

Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Thesis (LL. M.)--Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army, 1974. / "April 1974." Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaf iv). Also issued in microfiche.

Thesis (LL. M.)--Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army, 1989. / "April 1989." Typescript. Includes bibliographical references. Also issued in microfiche.

The purpose of this study was to determine if male and female Counselor-Trainees enrolled in master's degree programs in the State of Oregon would emit significantly different responses to a new and professionally developed video-based client simulation. The sample consisted of ninety-two Counselor-Trainees enrolled during the 1975-76 academic year in the following Counseling and Guidance programs: (a) Oregon State University, Corvallis (b) University of Oregon, Eugene (c) Oregon College of Education, Monmouth (d) Portland State University, Portland (e) Lewis and Clark College, Portland The Counselor-Trainees were shown the "Our Gang Series" research simulation, a video recorded program consisting of ten client stimulus sequences. Written responses to the sequences were collected, typewritten, and coded so that judges would be sex-blind when evaluating a particular response. The Global Scale, a four point Likert-type scale, was utilized as a rating instrument. Two doctoral students in Counseling, familiar with the applications and parameters involved with the use of the rating instrument, assisted in evaluating responses. An index of agreement (interrater reliability =. . 85) was determined at the preestablished .05 level of significance. The following null hypotheses were examined: 1. There are no significant differences in mean Global ratings assigned by judges to male and female Counselor-Trainee responses to the "Our Gang Series" research simulation. 2. There are no significant differences in mean Global ratings assigned by judges to same-sex and opposite-sex stimulus sequences from the "Our Gang Series" research simulation. A one-way analysis of variance "F" statistic was selected to test for the significance of hypothesis one. A two-way analysis of variance was utilized to test for the significance of hypothesis two. The .05 confidence interval was chosen for all statistical analyses. Hypothesis one was rejected. The female Counselor-Trainee responses were assigned higher ratings than were their male counterparts. Hypothesis two was also rejected. There was an interaction effect. Same-sex pairings produced higher ratings than did opposite-sex pairings. Replications of this study utilizing samples from different demographic areas and comprised of different ethnic populations were recommended as a means of providing additional data which might prove helpful in further understanding the dynamics of counselor-client relationships. Replications of this study utilizing female and male investigators were suggested as a means of providing data concerning the possible presence of a researcher sex effect. / Graduation date: 1977