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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 503019)

  • 1. Law may force slash in pregnancy benefits.
    Geisel J
    Mod Healthc; 1979 Dec; 9(12):28. PubMed ID: 503019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Dependents' pregnancy-related medical benefits and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
    Frankel GW
    Duke Law J; 1983 Feb; (1):134-52. PubMed ID: 10259899
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The pregnancy disability amendment: what the law provides, part II.
    Trotter R; Zacur SR; Greenwood W
    Pers Adm; 1982 Mar; 27(3):55-6, 58. PubMed ID: 10254625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The pregnancy disability amendment: what the law provides: part I.
    Trotter R; Zacur SR; Gatewood W
    Pers Adm; 1982 Feb; 27(2):47-8, 50-4. PubMed ID: 10254624
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Employe must complain to EEOC before feds force abortion payment.
    Geisel J
    Mod Healthc; 1980 Mar; 10(3):34. PubMed ID: 10245570
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 3M settles pregnancy dispute.
    Geisel J
    Bus Insur; 1982 Jun; 16(24):1, 4. PubMed ID: 10255468
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Senate bill prohibits discrimination on pregnancy.
    Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 Nov; 32(5):14, 16. PubMed ID: 10304863
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. What the Pregnancy Discrimination Act means for hospitals.
    Stickler KB
    Trustee; 1979 Nov; 32(11):15-9. PubMed ID: 10244446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Update: new rights for pregnant employees.
    Lines PM
    Pers J; 1979 Jan; 58(1):33-7. PubMed ID: 10239889
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How federal discrimination laws affect health/welfare and pension benefit plans.
    Weiss FK
    Empl Benefits J; 1981 Mar; 6(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 10249983
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Colorado court rules employer, insurer bias in nonpregnancy coverage.
    Kazon PM
    Bus Health; 1988 Dec; 6(2):24. PubMed ID: 10291168
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Employee benefits: no abortion benefits, no contracts.
    Geisel J
    Mod Healthc; 1980 Feb; 10(2):30. PubMed ID: 10245551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. What does COBRA portend for the future?
    Borzi PC
    Bus Health; 1987 Dec; 5(2):4-6. PubMed ID: 10285171
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pregnancy and employment leave: legal precedents and future policy.
    Gardin SK; Richwald GA
    J Public Health Policy; 1986; 7(4):458-69. PubMed ID: 3805267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Single employee ineligible for maternity benefits.
    Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 Apr; 31(10):12. PubMed ID: 10304775
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Supreme Court's pregnancy decision: have we heard the last word?
    Stickler KB
    Trustee; 1977 Apr; 30(4):11, 13-4, 16. PubMed ID: 10305790
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bills to amend Title VII submitted in reaction to GE.
    Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 May; 31(11):10. PubMed ID: 10304787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The pregnant worker: who bears the burden?
    Bunch PL; McFarlane DR; Dowben C
    Women Health; 1979; 4(4):333-44. PubMed ID: 532181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Maternity exclusion in disability plans continues to be major legal issue.
    Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 Mar; 31(9):38-9. PubMed ID: 10304814
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Employment law--Title VII--Eighth Circuit holds that benefits plans excluding all contraceptives do not discriminate based on sex.--In re Union Pacific Railroad Employment Practices Litigation, 479 F.3d 936 (8th Cir. 2007), reh'g and reh'g en banc denied, No. 06-1706 (8th Cir. May 23, 2007).
    Harv Law Rev; 2008 Mar; 121(5):1447-54. PubMed ID: 18441613
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.