lease respond to 1 or more of the following questions regarding age & disability
ID: 3315068 • Letter: L
Question
lease respond to 1 or more of the following questions regarding age & disability discrimination:
Who is covered by the ADEA? Who is not? Is this fair? What are your thoughts?
How do you define Disabled? How has this caused problems for the courts? Give examples from the cases in your response.
Read the Huber v. Wal-Mart (2007) case at the end of Chapter 12. Upon appeal Wal-Mart won this case & despite being injured on the job, Joan Huber was reassigned to a position that paid half of what she had been previously earning. What do you think of this result? Does it comply with the ADA?
ari File Edit View History Bookmarks Window Help ILI Module 5 Quie FA2017 QM 215-CL O One of the theories regarding initial public offlering (IPO) pricing is that the inial retum y (change from offer to open price) on an iPO depends on the price revision x (change from pre -offer to offer price). Another fatr that may influence the initial rebrn is whether or not·isahigh-tech portion of the data on 264 po srms from January 2001 throu , September 2004, the ertre data set can be found on the excel link frm. The following table shows a Price Revision Price Revision 0%) Initial Return (%) initial Return (%) 9.88 21.84 2.22 2.86 0.00 2.25 20.93 Hightech 15 68 -49.96 4.39 -18.06 9.65 10.23 20.50 0.53 0.00 41 .26 6.10 0.00 10.19 -26.42 No No 2.80 46.35 4.99 17.79 0.00 -29.54 17.76 8.69 0.24 -0.97 2.59 8 98 -4.85 13.21 1.75 4.92 17.55 No 15.33 0.00 3.08 9.90 8.00 15.55 -9.79 21.83 9.13 43.63 0.00 No 10.23 -36 64 -32 05 27.56 -53.36 26 65 0.00 48.19 Yes 1.32 -33.83 -11.47 8.30 25 23 8 54 18.55 0.27 6.04 10.47 28.07 15 79 25.92 -4.78 -23 52 39 07 14.75 12.70 4.75 13.97 0.00 9 62 -23 12 7.81 8 24 8 10 14 66 19 73 12 60 0.00 14.63 4.32Explanation / Answer
Solution:
In this case, Pam Huber—a Wal-Mart employee, worked as an order-filler for thecompany until she became disabled. She sought, as a reasonable accommodation, reassignmentto a router position which was vacant and for which she was qualified . Wal-Mart did notautomatically reassign her to the router position, but required her to apply and compete withother applicants.
Wal-Mart filled the router position with a non-disabled individual, who was themost qualified applicant for the job.Huber in return was re-assigned to a less desirable janitorialposition with much lower pay . Huber sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)and the district court granted summary judgment for Huber. Wal-Mart appealed this motion.Huber's position in the case was that Wal-Mart should have automatically reassigned herto the router position without requiring her to compete with other applicants . Wal-Mart argued
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.