تكلم مع الذكاء الاصطناعي
Contemporary Business Law 8th Edition by Henry Cheeseman
النسخة 8الرقم المعياري الدولي: 978-0133578164Contemporary Business Law 8th Edition by Henry Cheeseman
النسخة 8الرقم المعياري الدولي: 978-0133578164 تمرين 1
Fairness of the Law In 1909, the state legislature of Illinois enacted a statute called the "Woman's 10-Hour Law." The law prohibited women who were employed in factories and other manufacturing facilities from working more than 10 hours per day. The law did not apply to men. W. C. Ritchie Co., an employer, brought a lawsuit that challenged the statute as being unconstitutional, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Illinois constitution. In upholding the statute, the Illinois Supreme Court stated:
It is known to all men (and what we know as men we cannot profess to be ignorant of as judges) that woman's physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a great disadvantage in the battle of life; that while a man can work for more than 10 hours a day without injury to himself, a woman, especially when the burdens of motherhood are upon her, cannot; that while a man can work standing upon his feet for more than 10 hours a day, day after day, without injury to himself, a woman cannot; and that to require a woman to stand upon her feet for more than 10 hours in any one day and perform severe manual labor while thus standing, day after day, has the effect to impair her health, and that as weakly and sickly women cannot be mothers of vigorous children.
We think the general consensus of opinion, not only in this country but in the civilized countries of Europe, is, that a working day of not more than 10 hours for women is justified for the following reasons: (1) the physical organization of women, (2) her maternal function, (3) the rearing and education of children, (4) the maintenance of the home; and these conditions are, so far, matters of general knowledge that the courts will take judicial cognizance of their existence.
Surrounded as women are by changing conditions of society, and the evolution of employment which environs them, we agree fully with what is said by the Supreme Court of Washington in the Buchanan Case; "law is, or ought to be, a progressive science."
Is the statute fair? Would the statute be lawful today? Should the law be a "progressive science"? W. C. Ritchie Co. v. Wayman, Attorney for Cook County, Illinois, 244 Ill. 509, 91 N.E. 695, Web 1910 Ill. Lexis 1958 (Supreme Court of Illinois)
It is known to all men (and what we know as men we cannot profess to be ignorant of as judges) that woman's physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a great disadvantage in the battle of life; that while a man can work for more than 10 hours a day without injury to himself, a woman, especially when the burdens of motherhood are upon her, cannot; that while a man can work standing upon his feet for more than 10 hours a day, day after day, without injury to himself, a woman cannot; and that to require a woman to stand upon her feet for more than 10 hours in any one day and perform severe manual labor while thus standing, day after day, has the effect to impair her health, and that as weakly and sickly women cannot be mothers of vigorous children.
We think the general consensus of opinion, not only in this country but in the civilized countries of Europe, is, that a working day of not more than 10 hours for women is justified for the following reasons: (1) the physical organization of women, (2) her maternal function, (3) the rearing and education of children, (4) the maintenance of the home; and these conditions are, so far, matters of general knowledge that the courts will take judicial cognizance of their existence.
Surrounded as women are by changing conditions of society, and the evolution of employment which environs them, we agree fully with what is said by the Supreme Court of Washington in the Buchanan Case; "law is, or ought to be, a progressive science."
Is the statute fair? Would the statute be lawful today? Should the law be a "progressive science"? W. C. Ritchie Co. v. Wayman, Attorney for Cook County, Illinois, 244 Ill. 509, 91 N.E. 695, Web 1910 Ill. Lexis 1958 (Supreme Court of Illinois)
التوضيح
موثّق
موثّق
Facts of the Case
The case is related to the concept of fairness of law. The case goes to back to 1909 when a statute named "Woman's 10 - Hour Law". This statue had put in restriction on the working hours of women engaged in factories and manufacturing units to 10 hours per day. The law was also applicable to women and not to men. One of the owners of such factories naming WCR Co. filed a lawsuit against the statue contending that it is unconstitutional as it hinders the Equal Protection Clause of Illinois constitution.
However, the Supreme Court upheld the statue. The Supreme Court stated that limiting the working hours of women is correct. The reasons stated by the Supreme Court were that of the physical capabilities of women, maternal role to be fulfilled by women and other roles and responsibilities of home which a woman has to undertake.
Issue concerning the case
The issue is whether the enactment of such statue is just and fair.
Secondly, whether this would be applicable in today's world.
Thirdly, should the law should be progressive science??
Findings and Decision of the Court
The court believed that the women had different biological characteristics in comparison to men. Moreover, their role in the upbringing of family cannot compete at the same level as men can. But this statue seems unfair and unjust. This is because during the trial of the court, women wanted to work for long hours to earn their livelihood. In addition, a statute like this would straightaway jeopardize the right of women to earn a living as per her skill set and honesty
If this statute would have come forward in today's world then it would have been revoked immediately. These days' women have been equally capable if not more than men as they have made huge strides in every sphere of life and profession. A law like this would be a complete objection for women to achieve a level of professional as well as personal growth.
Progressive science means the data which results in the formation of theory needs to be updated and modified with time. In legal terms the law or statute should be modified depending upon the change in the circumstances which led to such laws. In this case, the 10 hour women statute would hardly make sense in today's time of advancement and development of humans in general and women in particular.
The case is related to the concept of fairness of law. The case goes to back to 1909 when a statute named "Woman's 10 - Hour Law". This statue had put in restriction on the working hours of women engaged in factories and manufacturing units to 10 hours per day. The law was also applicable to women and not to men. One of the owners of such factories naming WCR Co. filed a lawsuit against the statue contending that it is unconstitutional as it hinders the Equal Protection Clause of Illinois constitution.
However, the Supreme Court upheld the statue. The Supreme Court stated that limiting the working hours of women is correct. The reasons stated by the Supreme Court were that of the physical capabilities of women, maternal role to be fulfilled by women and other roles and responsibilities of home which a woman has to undertake.
Issue concerning the case
The issue is whether the enactment of such statue is just and fair.
Secondly, whether this would be applicable in today's world.
Thirdly, should the law should be progressive science??
Findings and Decision of the Court
The court believed that the women had different biological characteristics in comparison to men. Moreover, their role in the upbringing of family cannot compete at the same level as men can. But this statue seems unfair and unjust. This is because during the trial of the court, women wanted to work for long hours to earn their livelihood. In addition, a statute like this would straightaway jeopardize the right of women to earn a living as per her skill set and honesty
If this statute would have come forward in today's world then it would have been revoked immediately. These days' women have been equally capable if not more than men as they have made huge strides in every sphere of life and profession. A law like this would be a complete objection for women to achieve a level of professional as well as personal growth.
Progressive science means the data which results in the formation of theory needs to be updated and modified with time. In legal terms the law or statute should be modified depending upon the change in the circumstances which led to such laws. In this case, the 10 hour women statute would hardly make sense in today's time of advancement and development of humans in general and women in particular.
Contemporary Business Law 8th Edition by Henry Cheeseman
لماذا لم يعجبك هذا التمرين؟
أخرى 8 أحرف كحد أدنى و 255 حرفاً كحد أقصى
حرف 255
