Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats

Prevention & Eating Green - missing mindset

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)      
Become a Fan Become a Fan

opednews.com

My comment - I hope that after you read this article BRIEFLY mentioned in the Cincinnati Enquirer but fully covered by James Nash of The Columbus Dispatch that you decide to boycott Totes/Isotoner in Westchester, Ohio.

::::::::

click here
Firing woman for taking unauthorized breaks to pump breast milk OK, Ohio top court rules
Thursday, August 27, 2009 10:05 AM
By James Nash
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
A Cincinnati-area company didn't discriminate against a new mother when it fired her for taking unauthorized breaks to pump milk from her breasts, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled this morning.

Totes/Isotoner, an outerwear manufacturer in West Chester, did not violate Ohio's pregnancy-discrimination law by firing general laborer LaNisa Allen for taking lactation breaks four hours into her shift.

Allen argued that her breasts ached five hours into her shift, when she was allowed a lunch break.

The court, however, said Totes/Isotoner was within its rights to fire Allen for "failure to follow directions."

Justice Paul E. Pfeifer dissented, and Justice Judith Ann Lanzinger said the Supreme Court should not have taken the case.

In an unsigned opinion, the court said Allen's status as a lactating mother isn't relevant to the dispute.


"In this case, the evidence in the record demonstrates that Allen took unauthorized breaks from her workstation, and Isotoner discharged her for doing so," the court wrote.

"Thus, the record as it was developed in the trial court fails to provide a basis from which a jury could conclude that Isotoner's articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for Allen's termination -- failure to follow directions - was a pretext for discrimination based on Allen's pregnancy or a condition related to her pregnancy."
*************************************************************************************************
My note - http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/ROD/docs/
Click here to openAllen v. totes/Isotoner Corp. (Slip Opinion) 2008-0845 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 2009-Ohio-4231

 

www.ohioelectionjustice.blogspot.com

I have various subject interests including exploring the reality of regaining all of our Constitutional Rights pre G.W. Bush, Jr.'s Presidency, Interfaith Activites for Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Christianity and all world religions inclusive. My (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this diary has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments