General Display |
![]() |
Schools & Instruction |
![]() |
Legal Services |
![]() |
Legal Notices |
![]() |
Classifieds |
![]() |
Salute to Civil Service Organization Month |
|
|||||
|
Know Your Rights As this column has repeatedly counseled, various options exist for filing a legal claim if you are a victim of employment discrimination. In fact, choices abound. First, you may rely on Federal, state and/or (if you are employed in New York City) local anti-discrimination laws. You may also choose to file your claim in different forums, including administrative agencies and Federal and state courts.
EEOC Charge In New York State, a Charge of Discrimination must be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the discriminatory act. If the matter is not resolved at the agency level, you then have the option to file your Title VII, ADA or ADEA claim in court. In the past, if plaintiffs failed to properly state their discrimination claims at the EEOC, judges tended to dismiss them once they were filed in court. The United States Supreme Court in Federal Express v. Holowecki and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Ximenes v. George Wingate High School addressed what content must be included in an EEOC charge to avoid dismissal in any subsequent court action. Each court offered a liberal interpretation of the filing requirement which favors employees, especially those who appear at the EEOC without the benefit of counsel. In Holowecki, 14 FedEx couriers filed a lawsuit alleging age discrimination under the ADEA. Based on the ADEA requirement that an EEOC Charge of Discrimination must be filed at least 60 days before a lawsuit is commenced, the District Court dismissed the lawsuit because no charge was ever filed. Liberal Interpretation Fortunately, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. On further appeal, the Supreme Court also sided with the employees in a somewhat surprising decision for a court which only last year imposed a restrictive filing requirement for Equal Pay Act claims. See "New Pay Claim Filing Rule," Aug. 8, 2007. The Supreme Court observed that neither the ADEA nor EEOC rules clearly define a "charge." The high court then ruled that the completed EEOC "Intake Questionnaire," which was filed with an employee's affidavit, satisfied the charge requirement. In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court relied on the EEOC's position that a formal charge is not actually needed provided the employee's written submission identifies the employee and the employer violating the ADEA. The written submission must also expressly request that the EEOC take action to vindicate the employee's rights. In Ximenes, the Second Circuit also provided a liberal reading of the EEOC's filing requirements. Unlike in Holowecki, the Ximenes age discrimination claim was initially stated in an EEOC Charge of Discrimination. The District Court dismissed the court complaint because the EEOC charge was missing a page and failed to include any specific allegation of age discrimination. Upholding a long line of cases, the Second Circuit reinstated the lawsuit because its age claim was "reasonably related" to the plaintiff's overall account of events stated in her EEOC charge. Forgivable Mistakes These two court decisions are a welcome relief and are bound to help preserve the lawsuits of employees who omit information or complete wrong forms at the EEOC. Still, employees who invoke Title VII, the ADA or the ADEA, and who are thus required to first file with the EEOC, should exercise caution and assert any and all claims of discrimination in a proper Charge of Discrimination. Being thorough when it comes to filing your EEOC Charge will help you to avoid defending against a motion to dismiss your discrimination claim in any subsequent lawsuit.
|
|||||