Jottings By An Employer's Lawyer |
Tuesday, August 24, 2004
If the Supreme Court Accepts Disparate Impact Under the ADEA -- Read Your Future
KAPL successfully defended against a disparate treatment argument as the jury found there was no intent to discriminate on the basis of age. But finding themselves bound by prior circuit precedent that an ADEA disparate impact claim is viable, the Court affirmed the district court verdict that the employer's complex attempt to legally carry out a reduction in force failed. Every employer or employer's counsel who doubts the importance of the upcoming Supreme Court decision should read this case for the types of issues that will have to be faced if Smith v. City of Jackson is not affirmed. Here, the court was probably less troubled than it might otherwise have been, since despite an apparently rigorous screening process, with several layers of review, 30 of the 31 employees selected for involuntary layoff were over 40. But anyone who has participated in a similar exercise should empathize with the HR and legal personnel whose actions are now being second (and no doubt third and fourth) guessed by the plaintiffs' lawyers, judges and anyone else who is thinking how easy it would have been to avoid this problem. Easier seen in hindsight than at the time. And if disparate impact exists under the ADEA, then many will have the chance to see for themselves just how "easy" it is.
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
|
![]() |
WWW Jottings |