Anti-discrimination law: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Reverted 1 edit by 211.105.107.101 (talk): Not needed (TW)
Citation bot (talk | contribs)
Add: s2cid, author pars. 1-1. Removed URL that duplicated unique identifier. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were actually parameter name changes. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. | Activated by AManWithNoPlan | All pages linked from User:AManWithNoPlan/sandbox2 | via #UCB_webform_linked
Line 41:
 
====Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990====
Employment rates for all disabled men and disabled women under 40 have decreased since the implementation of the ADA.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=DeLeire|first=Thomas|date=2000|title=The Wage and Employment Effects of the Americans with Disabilities Act|journal=The Journal of Human Resources|volume=35|issue=4|pages=693–715|doi=10.2307/146368|jstor=146368}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.nber.org/digest/dec98/w6670.html|title=Consequences of the Americans With Disabilities Act|website=www.nber.org|access-date=2018-07-17}}</ref> This effect is especially pronounced for those with mental disabilities and for those with lower levels of education.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=DeLeire|first=Thomas|s2cid=8311722|date=2000|title=The Unintended Consequences of the Americans with Disabilities Act|url=https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2835/52e81c8c90134ad1e8a3f04d6789496edd93.pdf|journal=Regulation|volume=23|pages=|via=}}</ref> However, there is evidence to suggest that the decrease in employment rates is partially explained by increased participation in educational opportunities.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Jolls|first=Christine|date=2004|title=Identifying the Effects of the Americans with Disabilities Act Using State-Law Variation: Preliminary Evidence on Educational Participation Effects|journal=The American Economic Review|volume=94|issue=2|pages=447–453|jstor=3592926|doi=10.1257/0002828041301867|pmid=29068190}}</ref> These decreases can be attributed to increased costs for employers to remain in compliance with ADA provisions; rather than bearing increased costs, companies hire fewer workers with disabilities.<ref>{{Cite journal|lastlast1=Acemoglu|firstfirst1=Daron|last2=Angrist|first2=Joshua|date=1998|title=Consequences of Employment Protection? The Case of the Americans with Disabilities Act|url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w6670|journal=|volume=|pages=|via=|doi=10.3386/w6670|citeseerx=10.1.1.321.1338}}</ref> While popular conception is that the ADA has created the opportunity for legal recourse for those with disabilities, less than 10% of ADA related cases find in favor of the plaintiff.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hcrcl34&div=9&id=&page=|title=The Americans with Disabilities Act: A Windfall for Defendants|pages=99|last=Colker|first=Ruth|date=1999|journal=Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review|volume=34|access-date=2018-07-17}}</ref>
 
====Prior to 1960====
[[David Neumark]] and [[Wendy Stock]] find some evidence that sex discrimination/equal pay laws boosted the relative earnings of black and white females and reduced the relative employment of both black women and white women.<ref>{{cite journal |firstfirst1=David |lastlast1=Neumark |first2=Wendy A. |last2=Stock |title=The Labor Market Effects of Sex and Race Discrimination Laws |journal=[[Economic Inquiry]] |volume=44 |issue=3 |year=2006 |pages=385–419 |doi=10.1093/ei/cbj034 |citeseerx=10.1.1.493.3430 }}</ref>
 
==Exceptions==