Document: 429 U.S. 125 97 S.Ct. 401 50 L.Ed.2d 343 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Petitioner,v.Martha V. GILBERT et al. Martha al., Petitioners, v. COMPANY. Nos. 74-1589 and 74-1590. Argued Jan. 19-20, 1976. Reargued Oct. 13, Decided Dec. 7, Rehearing Denied 25, 1977. See 1079, 825. Syllabus This class action was brought by respondents challenging as violative of Title VII the Civil Rights Act 1964 disability plan petitioner. Under petitioner provides nonoccupational sickness accident benefits to all its employees, but disabilities arising from pregnancy are excluded. The District Court following trial held that exclusion constituted sex discrimination in violation VII. Appeals affirmed, finding intervening decision Geduldig Aiello, 417 484, 94 2485, 41 256, wherein this disparity treatment between pregnancy-related other not under Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment, applicable a context. § 703(a)(1) it is an unlawful employment practice for employer discriminate against any individual with respect compensation because individual's sex. Held: Petitioners' does violate failure cover disabilities. Pp. 133-146. (a) plan, which strikingly similar one Geduldig, "does exclude anyone benefit eligibility gender merely removes physical condition list compensable . Absent showing distinctions involving mere pretexts designed effect invidious members or other, lawmakers constitutionally free include coverage legislation such on reasonable basis, just condition." U.S., at 496-497, n. 20, 2491-2492. Since sex-based case like must trigger 703(a)(1), precisely point holding petitioner's providing general gender-based all. 133-136. (b) There no more here than there pretext discriminating women, since pregnancy, though confined ways significantly different typical covered disease disability. P. 136. (c) Gender-based result simply employer's less inclusive. Petitioner's insurance package covering some risks excluding others has been selection included creates discriminatory effect. 136-140. (d) A 1972 guideline Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) relied upon respondents, only conflicts earlier EEOC pronouncements odds consistent interpretation Wage Hour Administrator 703(h) VII, amended Pay Act, legislative history both support "plain meaning" language used Congress when enacted 703(a) (1). 140-145. 4 Cir., 519 F.2d 661, reversed. Theophil C. Kammholz, Washington, D. C., General Elec. Co. Ruth Weyand, Gilbert others. J. Stanley Pottinger, United States, amicus curiae. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioner, Electric Co.,1 employees pays weekly benefits. Excluded plan's coverage, however, pregnancy. Respondents, behalf women seeking, inter alia,2 declaration constitutes 1964, 78 Stat. 253, amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e seq. Eastern Virginia, merits, Electric's employee violated 375 F.Supp. 367. we granted certiorari, 423 822, 96 36, 46 39. We now reverse. 2 * As part total package, Weekly Sickness Accident Insurance Plan (Plan) amount equal 60% employee's normal straight-time earnings. These payments paid who become totally disabled accident. Benefit normally start eighth day (although if hospital bed patient, will immediately), continue up maximum 26 weeks continuous period successive periods due same related causes.3 3 named present former hourly production plant Salem, Va. Each these pregnant during 1971 1972, while employed Electric, each presented claim company absent work claims were routinely denied ground did provide disability-benefit absence pregnancy.4 thereafter filed charges alleging refusal pay time lost childbirth discriminated her Upon waiting requisite number days, instant commenced Court.5 complaint asserted Damages sought well injunction directing within terms conditions Following trial, made findings fact conclusions law, entered order determined Plan, had engaged 2000e-2(a)(1). found necessarily either "disease" "accident," disabling six eight weeks;6 approximately "(t)en per cent pregnancies terminated miscarriage, disabling";7 10% complicated diseases may lead additional disability.8 noted evidence introduced good deal stipulated, concerning relative cost male female employees,9 indicated that, excluded, least high as, substantially higher than, employee.10 5 inclusion scope would "increase G. E.'s (disability plan) costs which, large, undeterminable." F.Supp., 378. declined find actuarial value men women,11 went decide even economic equivalence, have justified otherwise comprehensive plan. Regardless whether including might make costly men, "(i)f intends sexually equalize opportunity, be exception differential defense." Id., 383. 6 ultimate conclusion basis operation program id., 385-386. An enjoining continuing future award monetary relief affected. Petitioner appealed Fourth Circuit, court divided vote affirmed judgment 7 Between date Court's rendered decided Appeals, Aiello 256 (1974), where rejected very established California law Amendment represented discrimination. majority felt controlling arose F.2d, 666-667. dissenting disagreed impact 668-669. certiorari consider important issue construction VII.12 II 8 Section relevant shall 9 "to his compensation, terms, conditions, privileges employment, race, color, religion, sex, national origin," 10 While necessary inference Congress, choosing language, intended incorporate into concepts evolved decisions construing similarities congressional those surely indicate latter useful starting interpreting former. Particularly defining term "discrimination," nowhere defined, cases afford existing body analyzing discussing legal context wholly dissimilar concerns manifested enacting think, therefore, our supra, dealing quite determining In system funded entirely contributions deducted wages participating rate 1% salary annual $85. respects, see 487-489, S.Ct., 2487-2488. 11 appellee's protection challenge statutory scheme. first noted: 12 "We cannot agree amounts Clause. persons groups eligible program. classification challenged relates underinclusiveness set State selected insure." 494, 2491. 13 emphasized again, later 14 "(T)his thus far cry Reed Reed, 404 71, 92 251, 30 225 (1971), Frontiero Richardson, 411 677, 93 1764, 36 583 (1973), based such. true can pregnant, follow every considered Frontiero, supra. Normal objectively identifiable unique characteristics. condition. 15 "The lack identity excluded becomes clear most cursory analysis. divides potential recipients two nonpregnant persons. group exclusively female, second includes sexes." 2492. 16 quoted leaves doubt reason rejecting California's disability-benefits itself 17 recognized course, end analysis, should shown "that other," ibid. But semblance made: 18 "There record insured worked definable aggregate risk derived protected not. Likewise, not." 19 exist effect, need reach question what sort standard govern review showing. (1973); (1971). 20 therefore wrong concluding reasoning trigger, this, 21 "pretex(t) other." expressed view actually turned conceded "invidious" think so doing misread opinion. opinion, distinction face nonetheless subterfuge accomplish forbidden comparable respects yet race Pregnancy is, all, often voluntarily undertaken desired condition, 375, 377. do infer simple women. contrary arguments adopted lower courts expounded Brethren largely Geduldig. 22 suit grounded rather Clause, recognize prima facie circumstances proof facially neutral another. Washington Davis, 426 229, 246-248, 2040, 2051, 48 597 (1976). For example, challenge, provisions 703(a)(2),13 test, if, intent, consequences test "invidiously racial impermissible classification," Griggs Duke Power Co., 424, 431, 91 849, 853, 28 158 Even assuming prove intent establish cf. McDonnell Douglas Corp. Green, 792, 802-806, 1817, 1824-1826, 668 effect.14 23 attempted meet burden demonstrating resulting coverage.15 Whatever probative before subject case, tended illustrate operate, fact, indisputable baseline "(t)he fiscal accrue sexes," 497 disturb note neither finding, nor financial "worked program," 496, (and appears), nothing covers risks, excludes others, 2491-2492.16 "package" going presently concerned exactly categories risk, nondiscriminatory sense "(t)here worth impossible scheme receive benefits; say, all-inclusive.17 appears, constitute compensate them destroy presumed parity benefits, accruing alike, results evenhanded risks. To hold endanger commonsense notion "underinclusion" impacts, disabilities, heavily other.18 Just facial so, too, none here. III 24 told, analysis purpose underlying inconsistent guidelines EEOC, asserted, entitled "great deference" Griggs, 433-434, 854-855; Phillips Martin Marietta Corp., 400 542, 545, 498, 27 613 (1971) (Marshall, J., concurring). rely promulgated states pertinent part: 25 "Disabilities caused contributed abortion, childbirth, recovery therefrom are, job-related purposes, temporary treated health sick leave available connection employment. (Benefits) applied they disabilities." 29 CFR 1604.10(b) (1975).19 evaluating contention confer authority promulgate rules regulations pursuant Title. Albemarle Paper Moody, 422 405, 95 2362, 2378, 45 280 (1975).20 mean consideration Albemarle, supra; Espinoza Farah Mfg. 414 86, 94, 334, 339, 38 287 (1973). properly accord weight administrative declared force Standard Oil Johnson, 316 481, 62 1168, 1169-1170, 86 L.Ed. 1611 (1942), enabling statute themselves supply imposition liability, see, e. g., 23(a). Securities Exchange 1934, 78w(a). statement role interpretative rulings Skidmore Swift & 323 134, 140, 65 161, 164, 89 124 (1944), said: rulings, interpretations opinions their authority, experience informed litigants resort guidance. particular depend thoroughness evident consideration, validity reasoning, consistency pronouncements, factors give power persuade, lacking control." fare standards. It contemporaneous years after enactment More importantly, flatly contradicts position agency enunciated date, closer governing statute. letter Counsel dated October 17, 1966, states: "You requested above long-term continuation 1964. "In recent regarding stated, 'The policy area seek compare illness injury maternity anticipated working life employees.' Therefore, according facts stated above, company's medical expenses delivery employees' children, VII." App. 721-722. 31 few later, expressly issued 1601.30 (1975), EEOC's "an discriminatory." 735. 32 past conflicted agency. Housing Foundation, Inc. Forman, 421 837, 858-859, 2063-2064, 44 621 (1975); 92-96, 339-340. short, discount given guideline, marks judged standards Skidmore, 33 also persuasive indications sharply indicia proper sex-discrimination VII's prohibition notable primarily brevity. especial attention 206(d),21 adding sentence: 34 "It subchapter differentiate differentiation authorized section 206(d) 29." 2000e-2(h). 35 sentence proposed Bennett Senate bill, 110 Cong.Rec. 13647 (1964), Senator Humphrey, floor manager amendment "unmistakably clear" "differences industrial plans, retirement options law," 13663-13664. Because amendment, 6(d) well, interpretive regulation explicitly "If wage prohibited payments, greater other. unequal opposite sexes situation not, 6(d), employees." 800.116(d) (1975). 37 Thus, critical solely "deference" appropriate agencies, ourselves pointed diametrically directions conflicting hand, Administrator, 703(h). reduced abdication agency, containing suggestion new source discovered years, stands virtually alone. Contrary Senate. They seems us 703(a)(1). 39 concept known having associated nearly century, carrying long judicial construction. When makes "discriminate .," without further explanation meaning, readily meant something traditionally meant, Morton Mancari, 535, 549, 2774, 2482, 290 (1974); Ozawa 260 178, 193, 43 65, 67, 67 199 (1922). here, Gemsco Walling, 324 244, 260, 605, 614-615, 921 (1945). 40 Reversed. STEWART, concurring. I join se (1) failed Unlike my Brother BLACKMUN, understand 158, specifically, significance generally proving case. concurring part. concur insofar holds se, VII; plaintiffs effect; proof. never factor longer law. BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL concurs, dissenting. 47 today violating seq., private adopt compensates except affecting respectfully dissent. Today's repudiates charged Congresss implementation rejects unanimous Courts addressed question. Communications Workers American Tel. Tel., 513 1024 (CA2 1975), cert. pending, No. 74-1601; Wetzel Liberty Mut. Ins. 511 (CA3 vacated jurisdictional grounds, 424 737, 1202, 435 (1976); 661 (CA4 (this case); Tyler Vickery, 517 1089, 1097-1099 (CA5 1975); Satty Nashville Gas 522 850 (CA6 75-536; Hutchinson Lake Oswego School Dist. 961 (CA9 75-1049. unusual presents resolution glance turns conceptual framework chosen identify describe operational features By focus program, purported justifications exclusions, Commission, plaintiffs, triggered, argue, omission "only (are subjected) substantial loss income disability." Brief curiae 12. 49 different. views representing gender-free assignment accordance techniques. From perspective lone mutually sexes. relies descriptive borrowed 2491-2492, (1974): Ante, 409. According Court, assertedly sorting process precludes constituting Presumably, self-evident inquiry select accurate realistic analytical approach. At outset, soundness assumption untainted product gender-neutral risk-assignment examined historical backdrop practices existence nonexistence policies Secondly, pattern then evaluated broad social objectives promoted believe compels purely fanciful. demonstrates incompatible overall unjustifiably rejected. 51 purports state-operated Although quotes footnote length, ante, 134-135, finally grapple own terms. 52 Considered favorably view, proposition standing alone said fall category classifications rest "gender such," 496 Beyond offers little helpful Surely offends common suggest, 136, revolving around minimum, strongly "sex related." See, Cleveland Board Education LaFleur, 632, 652, 791, 802, (1974) (Powell, Indeed, principles provided legitimate independent input decisionmaking process, Geduldig's outcome qualified explicit reservation could demonstrated pregnancy-centered "mere .." 53 obliges determine sex-linked universe neutral, considerations, stemmed purposefully downgraded women's labor force. coupled presumption favoring satisfied prompted concerns, deny effectuating reforms " 'one step time.' 495, deference Instead, reaching purposeful made, disregards served undercut opportunities employed.1 Moreover, studiously ignores undisturbed "discriminatory attitude" toward "a motivating policy," 367, 383 (E.D.Va.1974), "neutral (neither) face" "in intent." 382.2 54 Plainly then, appraisal "not all," easily squared proceeds discussion criteria suffice explain argues "comparable" "voluntary" "disease." Ibid. fallacy argument "non-voluntariness" construed application policy. 55 characterization "voluntary"3 factor, correctly noted, "other disability, (General Electric) eliminating so-called 'voluntary' disabilities," sport injuries, suicides, venereal disease, incurred commission crime fight, elective cosmetic surgery. 665. Similarly, label "disability" deemed determinative disqualification debilitating miscarriages 377, "diseases" intuitive word, ibid., recovering stricken severe unrelated 56 principal supposed neutrality withstand central demonstrate principle described : (and) 2492, quoted, 138. fostering impression faced underinclusive fashion irrespective proves simplistic misleading. although contractible gender, insures prostatectomies, vasectomies, circumcisions specific reproductive counterparts Again, affords sex-specific otherwise, coverage.5 Accordingly, appropriately remarkeds "(T)he concern defendants reference apparent balancing statistically buttresses attitude characterized elsewhere policy." 57 If acceptance sex-neutral plaintiffs' perception sex-conscious expressive secondary status force, warrant rejection plaintiffs'. frame lends intentional, sex-laden wisdom propriety approach programs. 58 Of demonstration Notwithstanding unexplained inexplicable implications opinion,6 238-239, 2046-2047, 422, 2373-2374, 1824, 432, 854, Appeals7 firmly settled 703(a)(2), defined class. 59 three divisible sets effects. First, afflict 4, Second, male-specific predominant males. Finally, female-specific female-impacted covered, prevalent, focuses mutual understandably contrast, effects pinpoint adverse However defines profile aims furthered filtered through phrase discriminate" contained fairly forbid commonplace men. 60 matter policy, paradigm example type complex wisely left mandate. H.R.Rep.No.92-238, p. (1972). And, accordingly, prior consistently acknowledged persuasiveness area. decisions, "entitled consideration," allows, 141, deference." 2378; Nonetheless, abandons squarely repudiate "(d)isabilities (under) attributed interrelated events: 8-year delay promulgation Commission's interim letters expressing includable Neither event supports interpretation. 61 true, 143, brief mention appears early surprising, fresh uncharted mandate, candidly study required contours proscribed defined. Fed.Reg. 14927 (1965). proceeding cautiously, outset relationship announcing "policies devised afforded job pregnancy." First Annual Report Fiscal Year 1965-1966 (1967). During succeeding seven develop coherent pregnancy-oriented pursuit adjudicatory functions8 engaging studies organizations President's Citizens' Advisory Council Status Women. Address Jacqueline Gutwillig, Chairwoman, Council, cited 1159. investigations market "review (of) preparatory issuing formal guidelines," 1161, culminated agency's formalized, systematic "(e)mployment relating childbirth." elapsed issuance refused impose liability employers deliberation, final determination followed thorough well-informed consideration. realistically viewed, extended evaluation admittedly problem unwillingness additional, potentially premature stages ought perceived commended. bitter irony care preceded condemned tardy indecisiveness, irresponsibly employers' formative labeled inconsistency, indecisiveness inconsistency bootstrapped reasons denying deference. 63 me, represents particularly conscientious deliberations and, merits Certainly, out intent. On contrary, pregnancy-inclusive rule distribution "sickness" Railroad Unemployment 351(k)(2). Furthermore, shortly announcement rule, approved President signed essentially identical Department Health, Welfare IX Amendments 1681(a) (1970 ed., Supp. V). 86.57(c) federal workers jurisdiction Service Federal Personnel Manual, ch. 630, subch. 13-2 (FPM 990-2, May 6, 1975). 64 formulations responses uniform testimony governmental show exclusions built programs financially act break down continuity relationship, thereby exacerbating comparatively transient Dept. Commerce, Consumer Income (Series P-60, 93, July 1974); Women's Bureau, Labor, Underutilization Women (rev. ed. 1971). dictating solution accepted Western country. Education, Welfare, Social Security Programs Throughout World, 1971, pp. ix, xviii, xix (Research 40). difficult comprehend anything "sufficiently reasonable" "accepted reviewing courts." Train Natural Resources Def. 60, 75, 1470, 1480, 731 belief effecting 139, plainly Terms ago Lau Nichols, 563, 786, another provision Act. phenomenon encased unavoidably takes meaning products enactment, demand uniqueness "disadvantaged" individuals.9 understanding today's environment warrants taking account fashioning policies. hypothetical situations conjectured 139-140, contemporary creatures cultural vacuum devoid stereotypes signals woman employee. seriously contends companies conceptualized developed disability-by-disability strictly fashion.10 "unique to" dominated. light experience, practices, all-inclusive design burdened woman, fully consonant objective assure equality eliminate devices fostered (sexually) stratified environments disadvantage (women)." 800, 1823. 66 affirm Appeals. STEVENS, 68 word "discriminate" appear Clause.1 constitutional heavier discrimination,2 control possibly use decade opinion.3 fresh, simple, construction: Does contract treats absenteeism differently kind certain individuals sex? 69 affirmative answer illegality, defense justify disparate situations. justification. negative threshold defeat illegal effect.4 referred criteria, voluntary involuntary, perhaps costly. involve kind. 70 Rather, places itself.5 definition, discriminates sex; capacity differentiates male. hiring, promotion, acceptability excuse absence, questions motive, expertise, BRENNAN persuasively exposes, STEWART BLACKMUN refer, conclude requires reached unanimously. All parties joined petitioning writ certiorari. moving party affirmed. agreed purposes briefing oral argument, convention writing Respondents represent September 14, damages denial. With self-insurer. obtained, outside California, Metropolitan Life involves payment tentative premium only, adjustment actual experience. Pretrial Stipulation Facts, P 11, app. 175-176. service processing claims, remains, practical Additionally, terminates "on you cease active Benefits cessation" continued Plan. personal leave, layoff, strike, respondent Emma Furch, took April hospitalized non-pregnancy-related pulmonary embolism 21, embolism. "since discontinued Plan." Plaintiffs employees; International Union Electrical, Radio Machine Workers, AFL-CIO-CLC (IUE); latter's affiliate, Local joint collective-bargaining representative, IUE, maintenance Va., plant. "specific findings": "1. voluntary, incidence negligent accidental conception occurs. "2. Pregnancy, disease. "3. complications weeks, delivery, slightly before, several recuperation." "Five percent stimulated Five diseases. charts stipulation 24, 1973: "143. 1970 GE's follows: Male Female ---------- (new) 19405 15509 Average duration days thousand 77 173 246,492 89,705 Total $11,279,110 $7,405,790 $45.76 $82.57 "144. ------------ ----------- 22,987 17,719 99 217 231,026 81,469 Totral 14,343,000 $9,191,195 $62.08 $112.91" introduced, addition material 9, Paul Jackson, actuary, calculated "costs 170% females males ." objectionable affects affect gives equalized Defenses bottomed evidence, such, regard, "Whatever inferences suggested statistical data presented, presume draw precise limited data." 382-383. 127 1, petition. questions, merit concluded merit. subsection "(2) limit, segregate, classify way deprive tend adversely employee, origin." 2000e-2(a)(2). discrimination, traditional civil litigation establishing acts complain 425, 2375, 668. placed "of requirement manifest question," arise until shown, 2375. That self-insures change acting insurer, 492, 2489-2490. values, "insure" essence, extra form fringe remove instead, increase "insurance," clearly wished purchase purchased insurance, "extra" seem acknowledge 18, infra, illogically suggest because: "A spend money buy she wants income, whereas expenditure GE Supplemental Reargument 11. Yet, incremental over counterpart possibility proscription require amount. assuming, did, 383, ban means "greater benefit(s)" differing roles "the human existence." tacitly admit "GE obligation 143. difficulty vividly portrayed closing paying sphere pay," Response Reply 7. statement, converse, indicate, perceiving discrimination" quickly no-win situation. ("(W)e imposing violates right equally "). Troublesome problems reinforce prohibiting intend depart longstanding Jefferson Hackney, 406 548-549, 1724, 1732-1733, 285 1604.9(b) restates "between regard benefits." "authority suitable procedural carry subchapter," 713(a), 2000e-12(a). No contends, above-quoted nature 6(d)(1) 206(d)(1), provides, "No discriminate, establishment employed, he jobs performance skill, effort, responsibility, performed (i) seniority system; (ii) (iii) measures earnings quantity quality production; (iv) era openly play minor originally conceived 1926, offered 'women responsibilities life, probably hoping get married soon company.' 958, excerpted Loth, Swope G.E.: Story Gerard Business (1958). 1930's 1940's participate business practice, pursue scale two-thirds level men's. 1002. reflect potentialities 644, 798, forced nonpayment payments. found: instances take months birth permitted return birth. varied regardless desire ability remain off arbitrary child." 385. February 1973, coinciding commencement suit, abandoned forced-maternity-leave directive. looks 'consequences,' intent," "(a)ny 'inextricably sex-linked' Act." 664. overbroad, occurs." assume, inability involuntary conceptions, obnoxious, intrusive means, decision-maker's treating induced. instructive exclusion. 5, delivering stillborn baby nine later. home, suffered blood clot lung, rehospitalized. severed 372. Had separated stoppage shallowness "underinclusive" transparent. assembled catalogue ailments befall humanity, systematically proceeded predominantly afflicts still operates equally: Women, pregnancies, breast cancer, female-dominated Along lines, occurs disproportionately sickle-cell anemia, freely troubling cryptic "but cf." citation 137, mystifying. involved nonclass plaintiff complained discharged racial, licit, motives. 796, 1821. motivation thrust plaintiff's complaint, "effects" entire tangentially issue, 805 19, 1826. proved affirmatively occurred. illicit inferable interplay four together reveal complainant vis-Ea-vis prospective employees. 1824. Only satisfies articulating "some legitimate, rejection," discriminate. 804, 1825. juncture, composition rehire "conformed against" group. 805, allowing "effect," setting individualized Equally unacceptable implication penultimate paragraph 145, coterminous Not fleeting dictum irrelevant precedes it, conflict line page, contradicted last Term's 239, 2047, 597, U.S.L.W. 4789, 4792 (1976): adjudicating decline today." Boston Chapter, NAACP Beecher, 504 1017, 1020 (CA1 States Wood, Wire Metal Lathers, 46, 471 408, 1973); Pennsylvania O'Neill, 473 1029 1973) (en banc); Chesapeake Ohio R. 582, 586 1972); Hayes Int'l 456 112, 120 Masonry Contractors Assn. Memphis, Inc., 871, 875 Carpenters, 457 210, 214 (CA7 N. L. Industries, 479 354, 368 (CA8 Ironworkers 443 544, 550-551 1971); Muller Steel 509 923, 927 (CA10 Davis 168 U.S.App.D.C. 42, 512 956, 960 rev'd revised endorsed "effect only" outlined therein identifying "increasingly complex" "forms incidents "may obvious glance." synopses positions course activities, Reports Congress. special instruction Chinese-speaking students San Francisco schools origin 601 interpreted "effect(s) (to discriminate) present," ultimately goal insuring meaningful opportunity (schools') educational 568, 789. Faced generalized objective, repudiated Francisco's commitment offerings resources child Chinese adjust school remedy deficiencies. anti-discrimination read remedial efforts linguistically deprived children." 571, 791 (Stewart, underlie 160, unhesitancy characteristics breadth 152, ample upholding accordingly. does, statutes, statutes. Compare FTC Salt 334 37, 44-45, 827-828, 1196 (1948) (Robinson-Patman Act) NLRB Great Dane Trailers, 388 26, 32-35, 87 1792, 1796-1798, 1027 (1967) (National Labor Relations Act). 238-248, 2040 2046-2052, Quite passed intimated relevance 429-432, 852-854, dividing 'potential persons.' 135. programs, policies, contracts historic facts. Nor state '(t)here not.' "risk" narrowly, prostate broadly uncompensated unemployment (subject 26-week limitations) partial protection.

Category: 1