SUMMARY 18.3 : Federal Express Corporation v. Holowecki, 128 S. Ct. 1147 (2008)
ID: 330557 • Letter: S
Question
SUMMARY 18.3 : Federal Express Corporation v. Holowecki, 128 S. Ct. 1147 (2008) UDICIAL REVIEW the Commission by or on behalf of an aggrieved person which alleges that the named prospective defendant was employed by Federal Express has engaged in or is about to engage in actions in viola- (FedEx) when FedEx implemented two tion of the Act." Before filing suit, Holowecki submit Health tion formance programs that tie employee compen d continued employment to certain perfor- res. Holowecki, along with other FedEx wees over the age of 40, claimed that the incen ted an intake questionnaire with the EEOC and filed a six-page affidavit. FedEx claimed that the question- naire and affidavit did not constitute a formal charge against the company because they were only one step was pub- 500 fpm. because aximum ce me unlawfully discriminated against older in a formal complaint procedure. FedEx argued that der the Age Discrimination in Employ- the EEOC's interpretation of the definition of "charge" DEA), claimants must file a charge with was outside the agency's statutory authority Eu Employment Opportunity Commission hen wait a statutorily defined period of CASE QUESTIONS ling suit in federal court. However, the ot define what constitutes a charge. The owth of ze hefore fi 1. Who prevails and why? 2. Will the court defer to the EEOC's interpretation? s authority to implement procedures 3. What is the standard used by the courts in cases carry out its objectives, promulgated a rule cnarge shall mean a statement filed with such as this one?Explanation / Answer
Federal Express won the case as the EEOC had not completed the procedures of levying a formal charge against the company. The employees had filled only the intake questionnaire, which was just the initial step of the procedure. The unlawful discrimination charge was not completed against FedEx Corporation. Hence the court had dismissed the plaintiff’s plea. The court will defer to the EEOC’s interpretation, as the court needs to understand the statement and defense of both the sides, before concluding the case. The court will give chance to the EEOC’s lawyer to put front the EEOC’s position of filling the charge against FedEx Corporation. In such cases where the defense of both the sides is not clear, the court gives a last chance for both the parties to put forward their case. The court will conclude its decision about the case only after the final hearing of both the parties.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.