Talk:Groff v. DeJoy
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Groff v. DeJoy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times, and has specific typeface formatting requirements. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Feedback from New Page Review process edit
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for the article! Hopefully you will write more articles. Have a good day!
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 05:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
This is a terrible reading of the case edit
This does not accurately describe the court's ruling nor does it accurately describe the consenting opinion. Here is an example of why the summary of the consenting opinion is wrongly summarized. I have made the summary of the consenting opinion in bold so it is easier to find.
To be sure, some effects on co-workers will not constitute “undue hardship” under Title VII. For example, animus toward a protected group is not a cognizable “hardship” under any antidiscrimination statute. Cf. ante, at 20. In addition, some hardships, such as the labor costs of coordinating voluntary shift swaps, are not “undue” because they are too insubstantial. See 29 CFR §§1605.2(d)(1)(i), (e)(1). Nevertheless, if there is an undue hardship on “the conduct of the employer’s business,” 42 U. S. C. §2000e(j), then such hardship is sufficient, even if it consists of hardship on employees. With these observations, I join the opinion of the Court.
Justice Sotomayor said that coordinating voluntary shift swaps would be too insubstantial to be considered "undue". She never said employee hardships were too insubstantial.
74.218.56.36 (talk) 18:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC)