Workers' rights boosted by US Supreme Court

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The US Supreme Court this year made a number of key rulings on workplace discrimination which, unusually for the conservative court, mostly favored workers over their bosses.

Last week, the US high court ruled in favor of several workers in a high-profile age discrimination lawsuit. In a 7-1 decision, the court said an employer bore the burden of explaining its reasons for laying off some two dozen workers -- all of whom happened to be aged over 40.

The court ruled that employers must provide "reasonable factors other than age" for the action in order to successfully defend itself against an age discrimination lawsuit.

...

In an important ruling in February, the court found by a vote of seven to two that an age discrimination suit could proceed even though the employee who filed it erred when filing out the paperwork to make the claim.

That same day, justices also unanimously found that it was possible to present evidence of discrimination presented by other employees in the workplace, even if they had a different supervisor than that of the person filing the discrimination claim.

And in May, in two majority decisions, the judges also declared that laws which allow workers to bring discrimination suits against their employers can be used to denounce any retaliation they are later subjected to.

The last workers case to be heard in the generally positive year was Thursday's ruling over age discrimination.

In the case of Meacham et al vs. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 26 workers sued the upstate New York company after it laid off scores of workers older than 40.

The majority opinion, written by Justice David Souter, makes it harder for employers to defend age discrimination lawsuits, and makes it easier for workers to prove age discrimination.

Experts said the court's recent ruling shows that it renders decisions on a case by case basis, and that the justices often succeed in peering out from behind their ideological blinders.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080625/ts_al...ssocietyjustice

[almaty 19]

about time, the court backed worker rights...

[tom&tata 2]

Company let go a bunch of worker - but the ones already at retirement age is a sure factor you will be let go. They have signed the acceptance of severance package - which say they would not sue the company. In 1 ocassion, company hire another person (fresh grad) to fill the position with 90% of the job desc of the prev person within 2 weeks.

Is this new ruling helping the person in retirement age if she wants to sue the company? She never had performance issue whatsoever when she was let go.

[HAL 9000 96]

Liberals in the Supreme Court! Oh Now what?!?!?!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

In the case of Meacham et al vs. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 26 workers sued the upstate New York company after it laid off scores of workers older than 40.

I wonder if it had something to do with possible liability due to higher chances of work related health problems?