The following list is of NINE things a woman couldn't do in 1971 - yes the date is correct, 1971.

[Backseat Driver]

150. This might still be happening in the 21st century...

DH once worked with a female recruiting supervisor to find a new employment opportunity. This woman had a very young and attractive account manager to whom he was to report the "results" of his interview(s). While discussing resumes after one such post-interview meeting, the account manager revealed to DH that her supervisor, the "recruiter," had hired the account manager after luring her away from her previous position by offering a much larger salary working for her. What was that account manager's previous position??? The account manager was the supervisor's previous nanny to her and her husband's children! The young lady had had no other "job" experience in the business world. Now just why would anyone relinquish a wonderful nanny and offer the chid-minder who was "working on her degree in Early Childhood Education," not Business Admin, such a "better" opportunity with a much larger salary to mind job candidates in IT. If you use your imagination, and, granted, nothing can be proven on a hunch, but there's a very likely explanation...LOL!

That said, with regard to "acceptable grounds for dismissal," in my state employers don't need a reason to "let go" of anyone they want, and they don't need a reason. The burden of proof is on the fired/laid off employee re litigation should one decide to pursue that. One can appeal not receiving unemployment benefits but that's about it as far as restoring one's salary and/or position. Violations of legislation designed for protection of the employee or their preferential status may only be in force for federal "civil service" situations as well. Though, of course, litigation has been pursued against corporate employers, even successfully in a few cases, it's an unlikely pursuit and/or win for the employee so removed from the payroll for non-performance and/or "just cause" issues. Businesses may get fined, but there's little interest in establishing a case for justice to the individual victims of the corporate violation.