WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP.

v.

VAUGHN ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Washington v. The Kroger Co., 671 F.2d 1072 (8th Cir. 1982)
  …intiff’s second charge, she claimed, among other things, that: “The employer failed to place me in a checker/clerk job because I am a Negro.” . Relying on our opinion in Vaughn v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 620 F. 2d 655 (8th Cir. 1980), vacated, 450 U.S. 972, 101 S.Ct. 1504, 67 L.Ed.2d 808 (1981), the District Court applied an improper burden of proof and required Kroger to show by a preponderance of the evidence that a legitimate reason for its employment action existed factually. As we now know from T…
• Locke v. Kan. City Power & Light Co., 660 F.2d 359 (8th Cir. 1981)
  …discriminatory reason for the challenged decision; vacated by the Supreme Court after Texas Dep’t of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (Bur-dine)), vacated and remanded, Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Vaughn, 450 U.S. 972, 101 S.Ct. 1504, 67 L.Ed.2d 808 (1981). . In this light, if the district court allows the probationary period and retains jurisdiction, further proceedings will not be on a clean slate and KCP&L should be required to carry the burden of persuasion…
• Alber v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., 654 F.2d 1271 (8th Cir. 1981)
  …ons or in the federal government, the paperwork involved' in developing and maintaining a nationwide list would be titanic. See Vaughn v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 620 F. 2d 655, 662 (8th Cir. 1980) (Gibson, J., dissenting), vacated and remanded, 450 U.S. 972, 101 S.Ct. 1504, 67 L.Ed.2d 808 (1981). VEVRA does not require employers to affirmatively provide preferential treatment for veterans. See Monroe v. Standard Oil Co., - U.S. -, -, 101 S.Ct. 2510, 2517, 69 L.Ed.2d 226 (1981) (construing 38 U.S.C. §…