I don't know what the law is in Wisconsin, but if memory serves me
correctly, the case involving Johnson and Johnson limited the employer's
right to assign certain tasks to women, or more to the point, not to
assign them to women during pregnancy because of the alleged ill effects
on the fetus (as judged by the employer, Johnson and Johnson.) The
Supremes said that J and J could not prevent a woman from choosing to
work within the area adjudged hazardous by the employer based on the
single fact that a pregnant woman might have her pregnancy adversely
affected by her job. J and J limited the choice to avoid worker
compensation, and perhaps other liability claims based on the job assignment.
This summary is from memory, so check the case for the correct facts. J
and J was the defendant, I do not know the name of the plaintiff.
Anthony Mournian
On Sun, 19 Nov 1995, Library Carlson M -- Hercules Inc - Wilmington wrote:
>
>
> To: law-lib@ucdavis.edu Inet
>
>
> I need help with Wisconsin law in re employee rights. I've
> checked the BNA Labor Relations Reporter and a few other
> employment looseleaf services; also checked Lexis under Wisconsin
> cases. I found nothing; problem is that I may not be using the
> correct search terms. Question is: Is there a Wisconsin law
> that governs an employer's right to control or take an employment
> action based on an off-the-job activity of the employee if the
> employer believes that the off-the-job activity could or would
> pose a safety hazard to the employee while performing his job? Or
> simply put, can a Wisconsin employer act on (or control)
> off-the-job activities of its employees for just cause?
> If you know of such a law, I would appreciate hearing from you.
> TIA, Peggy Carlson, Hercules Incorporated, Law Department,
> Wilmington, DE; 302.594.5678; FAX 302.594.7038; Internet:
> mcarlson@herc.com or lcarls00@counsel.com.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:02 PST