State Department violated ADEA
The D.C. Circuit found yesterday that the U.S. State Department illegally discriminated against one of its employees abroad.
August 09, 2012 at 05:57 AM
9 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The D.C. Circuit found yesterday that the U.S. State Department illegally discriminated against one of its employees abroad.
John R. Miller Jr. worked at the U.S. embassy in Paris until the State Department forced him to retire in July 2007 because he had turned 65 years old. He sued the department, claiming his forced retirement violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
Meanwhile, the State Department admitted it had forced Miller to retire because of his age because retirement is mandated at age 65 in France. The department also claimed it was exempt from ADEA because of another statute—the Basic Authorities Act, which promotes the hiring of U.S. citizens abroad.
But yesterday the D.C. Circuit reversed a lower court ruling and found that no such exemption exists.
“Even if the State Department were correct in reading this ambiguous passage as relating to State Department hiring, it is unclear how allowing the United States to discriminate against its own citizens on the basis of their age — or disability, race, religion, or sex — would promote the hiring of U.S. workers abroad,” Judge Merrick Garland wrote for the majority.
Read the Wall Street Journal Law Blog for more about the State Department's ADEA violation.
For more recent InsideCounsel stories about age discrimination and ADEA, read:
The D.C. Circuit found yesterday that the U.S. State Department illegally discriminated against one of its employees abroad.
John R. Miller Jr. worked at the U.S. embassy in Paris until the State Department forced him to retire in July 2007 because he had turned 65 years old. He sued the department, claiming his forced retirement violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
Meanwhile, the State Department admitted it had forced Miller to retire because of his age because retirement is mandated at age 65 in France. The department also claimed it was exempt from ADEA because of another statute—the Basic Authorities Act, which promotes the hiring of U.S. citizens abroad.
But yesterday the D.C. Circuit reversed a lower court ruling and found that no such exemption exists.
“Even if the State Department were correct in reading this ambiguous passage as relating to State Department hiring, it is unclear how allowing the United States to discriminate against its own citizens on the basis of their age — or disability, race, religion, or sex — would promote the hiring of U.S. workers abroad,” Judge Merrick Garland wrote for the majority.
Read the Wall Street Journal Law Blog for more about the State Department's ADEA violation.
For more recent InsideCounsel stories about age discrimination and ADEA, read:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMarriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
14-State Coalition Sues TikTok, Alleging Addictive Algorithms Trigger Mental Health Harms in Adolescents
Crisis Manager for 'Rust' Lands GC Role at One of Its Producers
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Christopher J. DeGroff, Andrew L. Scroggins and Samantha L. Brooks from Seyfarth Shaw have stepped in to represent AG Equipment Company in a pending lawsuit over alleged employment discrimination under the ADA. The case was filed Aug. 30 in Oklahoma Northern District Court by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of five former employees who contend that they were wrongfully terminated after seeking accommodations from the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Sara E. Hill, is 4:24-cv-00403, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. AG Equipment Company.
Who Got The Work
Samantha J. Hughes of Dykema Gossett has entered an appearance for Home Depot in a pending slip-and-fall personal injury lawsuit. The suit was filed Aug. 30 in California Central District Court by Countrywide Trial Lawyers on behalf of Ernestina Rolon. The case, assigned to U.S Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson, is 2:24-cv-07451, Ernestina Rolon v. The Home Depot, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
R. Evan Jarrold and Latiqua M. Liles of Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete have entered appearances for Walmart in a pending lawsuit for alleged breaches of the Family and Medical Leave Act. The complaint was filed Aug. 30 in Missouri Eastern District Court by Roberts, Wooten & Zimmer on behalf of a former Walmart employee who contends that he was wrongfully terminated for taking medical leave after contracting COVID-19. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Matthew T. Schelp, is 4:24-cv-01196, Weber v. Walmart, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough partner Molly Jean Given has entered an appearance for CooperCompanies, a medical device maker comprised of CooperVision and CooperSurgical, in a pending product liability lawsuit. The case, filed Aug. 27 in California Northern District Court by Girard Sharp and Sauder Schelkopf LLC, is part of a wave of cases brought on behalf of plaintiffs whose embryos failed to develop during in-vitro fertilization due to alleged contamination of the defendant's embryo culture media lots. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar, is 4:24-cv-06047, I.I. et al v. CooperSurgical, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Jacob Oslick of Seyfarth Shaw has entered an appearance for Prudential Insurance Co. of America in a pending ERISA lawsuit. The complaint, which pertains to short- and long-term disability benefits, was filed Aug. 29 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by the Cornerstone Law Firm on behalf of Catherine Alunni. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge John M. Gallagher, is 5:24-cv-04547, Alunni v. The Prudential Insurance Company Of America.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250