120 likes | 240 Views
Sex Discrimination. Sarah Bell Pages 268-272. Fuhr v. School District of the City of Hazel Park. Did not hire woman to coach boy’s varsity basketball Court of Appeals, sixth circuit Hired John Barnett- boys freshman coach- 2 yrs. Fuhr Girls varsity basketball coach- 10 yrs.
E N D
Sex Discrimination Sarah Bell Pages 268-272
Fuhr v. School District of the City of Hazel Park • Did not hire woman to coach boy’s varsity basketball • Court of Appeals, sixth circuit • Hired John Barnett- boys freshman coach- 2 yrs. • Fuhr • Girls varsity basketball coach- 10 yrs. • Boys jv and assistant varsity coach- 8 yrs.
Basketball Coach and Athletic Director • Boy’s varsity coach and athletic director retired in same year (both supported Fuhr) • Barnett and Fuhr only two who applied for basketball coach position • Only men on committee (neither coach or director invited)
Testimony • Previous Coach- district athletic director did not want him to participate • District a.d. denies that received any formal endorsement
Interview • Superintendent made final decision • Fuhr interviewed second • Superintendent left during interview and never returned • Community members expressed complaints about Fuhr coaching two varsity sports in succession • Superintendent had to comply with school board members- board president backed story • Stated- concerned about female being boy’s head basketball coach
Filing suit • Requested compensatory, punitive damages, and lost wages • Decision- Fuhr’s favor • $245,000- present damages • $210,000- future damages • Name Fuhr boy’s varsity basketball coach • Denied Hazel Park’s request for new trial
Ultimate question • Relevance- not about increase in pay over female position, but over jv position? • Fuhr presented evidence of gender issues • President of school board testified about concern of female coach male team • Principal confirmed to Fuhr after hiring Barnett
Notes • Title VII and Title IX different • Title VII • Sexual harassment on the job • Title IX • Prohibits unequal treatment with respect to “conditions of employment” • Courts construed “conditions” to include insulting and degrading
Clark County School District v. Breeden • Male supervisor read comment from psychological report of job applicant • Applicant had once told a coworker “I hear making love to you is like making love to the Grand Canyon” • Did not understand and another said he was explain it later-both men chuckled • Female administrator present and filed complaint
Court Decision • “simple teasing, offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to discriminatory changes in the ‘terms and conditions of employment.’”
Grove City College v. Bell (1984) • Title IX does not apply to private institutions as a whole • Only portions that receive federal funding • Program specific • Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 • Designed to overturn Grove City College • If one part of entity receives federal funds, whole entity covered