This HTML5 document contains 64 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n14https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Schultz_v._Wheaton_Glass_Co.
rdf:type
yago:Case107308889 yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Abstraction105854150 yago:Content105809192 yago:Event100029378 yago:Cognition100023271 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:Happening107283608 yago:Concept105835747 yago:WikicatLaborRights yago:Right105174653 yago:Idea105833840 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity
rdfs:label
Schultz v. Wheaton Glass Co.
rdfs:comment
Shultz v. Wheaton Glass Co., 421 F.2d 259 (3rd Cir. 1970) was a case heard before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1970. It is an important case in studying the impact of the Bennett Amendment on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, helping to define the limitations of equal pay for men and women. In its rulings, the court determined that a job that is "substantially equal" in terms of what the job entails, although not necessarily in title or job description, is protected by the Equal Pay Act. An employer who hires a woman to do the same job as a man but gives the job a new title in order to offer it a lesser pay is discriminating under that act.
dbp:name
Shultz v. Wheaton Glass Co.
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit_cases dbc:United_States_employment_discrimination_case_law dbc:United_States_gender_discrimination_case_law dbc:History_of_women_in_New_Jersey dbc:Millville,_New_Jersey dbc:1970_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_labor_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
20183877
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1064693403
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:List_of_gender_equality_lawsuits dbr:Millville,_New_Jersey dbc:Millville,_New_Jersey dbc:United_States_gender_discrimination_case_law dbr:Wheaton_Glass dbc:United_States_employment_discrimination_case_law dbc:1970_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Abraham_Lincoln_Freedman dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit dbr:Case_citation dbc:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit_cases dbc:History_of_women_in_New_Jersey dbr:Collins_Jacques_Seitz dbr:Bennett_Amendment dbc:United_States_labor_case_law dbr:Equal_Pay_Act_of_1963 dbr:Title_VII_of_the_Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 dbr:Ruggero_J._Aldisert dbr:Gender_equality dbr:Equal_pay_for_equal_work
owl:sameAs
n14:4uNJz freebase:m.04ydz2t wikidata:Q7432992
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:US-case-law-stub dbt:Wikisource dbt:Infobox_Court_Case dbt:Reflist
dbp:citations
17280.0
dbp:court
dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit
dbp:fullName
George P. Shultz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, v. Wheaton Glass Company
dbp:judges
dbr:Abraham_Lincoln_Freedman dbr:Collins_Jacques_Seitz dbr:Ruggero_J._Aldisert
dbo:abstract
Shultz v. Wheaton Glass Co., 421 F.2d 259 (3rd Cir. 1970) was a case heard before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1970. It is an important case in studying the impact of the Bennett Amendment on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, helping to define the limitations of equal pay for men and women. In its rulings, the court determined that a job that is "substantially equal" in terms of what the job entails, although not necessarily in title or job description, is protected by the Equal Pay Act. An employer who hires a woman to do the same job as a man but gives the job a new title in order to offer it a lesser pay is discriminating under that act.
dbp:dateDecided
1970-01-13
dbp:opinions
Freedman
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Schultz_v._Wheaton_Glass_Co.?oldid=1064693403&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
3374
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Schultz_v._Wheaton_Glass_Co.