17,954 research outputs found

    Are Quarterly Magazines Worthwhile?

    Get PDF
    When we had to clean our mailing list for the University of Nebraska Experiment Station Quarterly last fall, I took the opportunity to survey readership

    Alien Registration- Grant, Lillian I. (Crystal, Aroostook County)

    Get PDF
    https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/26552/thumbnail.jp

    Supervisors, Sex, and the Seventh Circuit: No Should Always Mean No

    Get PDF
    The Seventh Circuit in Tate v. Executive Management Services, Inc. faced the issue of whether an employee who rebuffs his supervisor\u27s sexual advances engaged in the kind of opposition to an unlawful employment practice protected by Title VII\u27s retaliation provision. The retaliation provision requires that an employee oppose any unlawful employment practice but does not define oppose. The Eighth Circuit has held that an employee engages the most basic form of protected activity by rebuffing a supervisor\u27s sexual advances. The Fifth Circuit, on the other hand, has found that an express rejection of a supervisorā€™s sexual advances does not qualify as opposition activity. The Seventh Circuit in Tate acknowledged the circuit split, declined to decide the issue, and decided the case on other grounds. The result of the Seventh Circuit\u27s decision in Tate, however, is that an employee who was given an ultimatum by his supervisor to choose between sex and his job, and was fired when he refused to sleep with his supervisor, was not protected under Title VII\u27s retaliation clause. This Comment explores this issue by examining the language of Title VII\u27s retaliation provision, the Supreme Court\u27s recent interpretation of the meaning of oppose in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn., the purposes behind the retaliation clause, and the practical implications of this issue. This Comment concludes that in most circumstances, an employee who rebuffs a supervisor\u27s sexual advances has opposed an unlawful employment practice and that by disregarding these concerns, the court\u27s result in Tate was incorrect

    Supervisors, Sex, and the Seventh Circuit: No Should Always Mean No

    Get PDF
    The Seventh Circuit in Tate v. Executive Management Services, Inc. faced the issue of whether an employee who rebuffs his supervisor\u27s sexual advances engaged in the kind of opposition to an unlawful employment practice protected by Title VII\u27s retaliation provision. The retaliation provision requires that an employee oppose any unlawful employment practice but does not define oppose. The Eighth Circuit has held that an employee engages the most basic form of protected activity by rebuffing a supervisor\u27s sexual advances. The Fifth Circuit, on the other hand, has found that an express rejection of a supervisorā€™s sexual advances does not qualify as opposition activity. The Seventh Circuit in Tate acknowledged the circuit split, declined to decide the issue, and decided the case on other grounds. The result of the Seventh Circuit\u27s decision in Tate, however, is that an employee who was given an ultimatum by his supervisor to choose between sex and his job, and was fired when he refused to sleep with his supervisor, was not protected under Title VII\u27s retaliation clause. This Comment explores this issue by examining the language of Title VII\u27s retaliation provision, the Supreme Court\u27s recent interpretation of the meaning of oppose in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn., the purposes behind the retaliation clause, and the practical implications of this issue. This Comment concludes that in most circumstances, an employee who rebuffs a supervisor\u27s sexual advances has opposed an unlawful employment practice and that by disregarding these concerns, the court\u27s result in Tate was incorrect

    Sub-2 cm/s passivation of silicon surfaces by aprotic solutions

    Get PDF
    Minimizing recombination at semiconductor surfaces is required for the accurate determination of the bulk carrier lifetime. Proton donors, such as hydrofluoric acid and superacids, are well known to provide highly effective short-term surface passivation. We demonstrate here that aprotic solutions based on bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)methane (TFSM) in hexane or pentane can also result in excellent passivation of (100)-orientation silicon surfaces. We show that the optimized TFSM-pentane passivation scheme can measure effective lifetimes up to 20 ms, with a surface recombination velocity of 1.7 cm s1 at an excess carrier density of 1015 cm3 . Fitting injection-dependent lifetime curves requires chemical passivation and field effect passivation from a negatively charged layer with a charge density of 1010ā€“1011 q cm2 . The slightly higher recombination velocity of 2.3 cm s1 measured with TFSM-hexane can be explained by a lower charge density in the passivating layer, suggesting that the steric hindrance associated with the solvent size could play a role in the passivation mechanism. Finally, phosphorus nuclear magnetic resonance experiments confirm that TFSM-based solutions have Lewis acidity without being superacids, which opens up opportunities for them to be used in materials systems sensitive to superacidic environments
    • ā€¦
    corecore