Abstract

Anti-nepotism rules in public organizations have led to law suits based on anti-discrimination statutes and the U.S. Constitution. Plaintiffs claim they are entitled to work with their spouses if they are qualified employees. Employers, on the other hand, defend anti-nepotism rules as a business necessity, arguing that married co-workers are a potentially disruptive influence in the office. A review of federal and state court decisions suggests that married co-workers rarely prevail in such cases. In this area of civil and constitutional litigation, public employer liabilities appear to be limited to situations where restrictions are unreasonably broad.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.