These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10308518)
21. Court acceptance of Uniform Guidelines provisions: the bottom line and the search for alternatives. Thompson DE; Christiansen PS Employee Relat Law J; 1983; 8(4):587-602. PubMed ID: 10259399 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The 'bottom line' after Connecticut v. Teal. Blumrosen AW Employee Relat Law J; 1983; 8(4):572-86. PubMed ID: 10259398 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Title VII discrimination in biochemical testing for AIDS and marijuana. Martin AA Duke Law J; 1988 Feb; (1):129-53. PubMed ID: 10295383 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Will the disabilities bill disable your group practice? Mandelman J Group Pract J; 1990; 39(2):44-6. PubMed ID: 10170560 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. The pre-employment inquiry guide. Koen CM Pers J; 1980 Oct; 59(10):825-9. PubMed ID: 10248747 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Arbitral standards in cases involving testing issues. Gallagher DG; Veglahn PA Labor Law J; 1986 Oct; 37(10):719-30. PubMed ID: 10279398 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Liability for age discrimination in the health care workplace. Stickler KB; Nelson MD J Health Hosp Law; 1988 Aug; 21(8):185-90. PubMed ID: 10288420 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Human rights and the employment process. Rayworth JF Dimens Health Serv; 1978 Nov; 55(11):25-7. PubMed ID: 710743 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Rehab Act calls for new approach to interviewing job applicants. Fischer GL Hospitals; 1978 May; 52(10):81-3. PubMed ID: 147850 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973--its impact on employee selection practices. Guy JH Employee Relat Law J; 1978; 4(1):2-23. PubMed ID: 10316624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. Stone JE Mon Labor Rev; 1980 Mar; 103(3):32-6. PubMed ID: 10309140 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. A legal perspective on the Bakke decision. Tallent SE Pers J; 1979 May; 58(5):296-302, 325. PubMed ID: 10241468 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Discrimination in the health care profession. A view from the "bench". Martin DK Med Law; 1988; 7(2):133-40. PubMed ID: 3231008 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Implications of the new EEOC guidelines. Dhanens TP Personnel; 1979; 56(5):32-9. PubMed ID: 10244400 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. To ask or not to ask: personnel selection practices: applications and interviews. Simon BE Am Libr; 1978 Mar; 9(3):141-3. PubMed ID: 10306523 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Management techniques for winning employment discrimination claims. Caiozzo C Health Serv Manager; 1979 Nov; 12(11):1-3. PubMed ID: 10244167 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Legal update--application of the ADA to contingent workers. D'Arruda K AAOHN J; 2001 Jul; 49(7):323-4. PubMed ID: 11760639 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The University of California v. Bakke: questions for the court. Novak M Regulation; 1978; 2(5):34-6. PubMed ID: 10238568 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Selection interviewing and the new uniform federal guidelines. Greenlaw PS; Kohl JP Pers Adm; 1980 Aug; 25(8):74-9. PubMed ID: 10248163 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Employee selection: must every job test be validated? Baker DD; Terpstra DE Pers J; 1982 Aug; 61(8):602-5. PubMed ID: 10258024 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]