Key court cases: Supreme court settles conflicting opinions on enforceability of releases of claims under the adea
✍ Scribed by Arthur F. Silbergeld; Patricia M. Cosgrove
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1998
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 359 KB
- Volume
- 25
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0745-7790
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
an a release of potential claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) that does not strictly C comply with the statutory requirements of the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA) be enforced or considered enforceable, or ratified, by an employee's acceptance and retention of severance benefits? If such a release is invalid and cannot be ratified, does an employee have to return or "tender back the severance benefits before pursuing an ADEA claim? The US. Supreme Court recently answered ' ' no' ' to these two questions. In Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc.,' a majority of the Supreme Court held that despite signing a release a former employee may pursue her claim for age discrimination under ADEA and that she does not have to tender back any money she received from her employer before filing suit. This decision resolved a conflict among the federal circuit courts.
The Supreme Court held that OWBPA, which amended ADEA, imposes specific requirements for releases covering ADEA claims and that an employee may not waive any right or claim unless the release or waiver satisfies these requirements. Strict adherence to the statutory requirements furthers OWBPA's goal to protect the rights and benefits of older workers by requiring that any waiver of those rights and benefits be "knowing and voluntary."
The Requirements of the 0 WBPA Under the OWBPA amendment to the ADEA,2 there are eight minimum requirements that a release purporting to waive ADEA claims must meet before it is considered "knowing and voluntary." Paraphrasing, these requirements are: