The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has ruled that the Workers’ Control Act of 1963, a law that protects workers’ right to organize and bargain collectively, violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The ruling is a victory for workers’ rights advocates, who have been fighting for years for workers compensation reform.
The court ruled that a federal law that would have expanded workers’ compensation to cover all workers in the workplace is constitutional.
The Workers’ Controlled Organizations Act of 1960 was passed by Congress to prevent organized labor from restricting the right to form and join unions and the right of workers to bargain collectively.
In recent years, however, Congress has weakened the protections of the workers’ control act by requiring employers to cover their employees’ health insurance premiums.
The Supreme Court has also struck down the Workers Control Act’s prohibition on unions in several states.
The workers control act passed by the Congress, which had been under attack from labor unions, was amended to make workers’ controlled organizations exempt from the labor laws.
The Workers’ control Act also required employers to give workers at least one year of notice of their right to strike and to make it clear that the act would apply to employees who did not work for the employer at the time of their strike.
But workers’ comp and other civil rights laws are designed to protect workers from employers who discriminate against them.
They provide an incentive for workers to get a job, and they help employers reduce injury and illness caused by unsafe workplaces.
The court found that the workers control statute does not meet these two requirements.
In the case of workers’ insurance, the workers compensation law requires employers to provide coverage for all workers, regardless of their age, gender, race, religion, disability, and other protected characteristics.
The workers control law does not provide this protection.
Moreover, because employers can make changes to workers’ pay and benefits, the court said, it is “virtually impossible for workers who do not receive this coverage to have their compensation reduced or even their benefits stopped.”
A majority of the court, in its decision, said that it was “no longer possible to distinguish between the protection offered by the workers controls act and the protection afforded by other civil remedies, including the right not to be compelled to pay the benefits of a former employee or a former co-worker.”
The court ruled against the government in its efforts to block the workers comp law.
The case is Workers’ Controls v.
Sebelius et al., No. 15-10117.