Employment
Issue: Did Sarah Bellum, as owner of VV, discriminate against Sally Caddis due to her age?
Facts: Sally Caddis is a 50-year-old woman that has worked at Sarah Bellum’s Vista Vu as a server for 10 years. Sarah Bellum is the sole proprietor of the 25-employee operation “Vista Vu” and it is acknowledged that Vista Vu affects interstate commerce. On Sally Caddis’ job application for Vista Vu she indicated that she was born in 1967 when in fact she was born in 1962. Caddis also stated that she spent time working at a four-star restaurant when in actuality, she never worked at such a restaurant. These discrepancies were not discovered until after the investigation commenced. Seth Anderson, who is mentioned in the deposition, is a 34-year-old …show more content…
1413). Also within Title VII Civil Rights Act is the burden-shifting method which was adopted by courts and often relied on by plaintiffs as a valid claim. The burden-shifting method is where it is discovered that circumstantial evidence is used to cover up one’s true motive for an employment decision (pp. 1414). The age discrimination in employment act (ADEA) prohibits discrimination of employees that are at least 40 years of age (pp.1426). In order for a company to be eligible to commit age discrimination they must: engage in an industry that that affects interstate commerce and employ at least 20 people. In order for an age discrimination to be deemed true, “the plaintiff must prove that age was the “but for” cause of the challenged job position” (pp. 1426). The Montana wrongful discharge from employment act states that it is a wrongful discharge if an employer terminates an employee for: refusing to do something illegal, without good cause, or the employer violates their own policy. “A prima facie case is a case that a plaintiff presents that eliminates the most common nondiscriminatory reasons for the challenging of an employment decision and creates the presumption of a discriminatory reason to the decision” (pp. …show more content…
Caddis, age 50, qualifies for the ADEA as well as Vista Vu for employing 25 employees and affecting interstate commerce. Bellum is claiming that Caddis was laid off with good cause because she stole 700$ from the register one evening and she was discourteous to a potential customer, barring no resemblance to age discrimination. Caddis claimed in her disposition that Bellum did hint at her retiring due to her age and that a change in employment for Vista Vu would be good, but Bellum denied such malicious claims and says the conversation was out of pure curiosity, which deems this argument very unlikely to hold up in court. However, it is convenient that a few weeks following this alleged retirement conversation an unexplainable money discrepancy occurs leading to the termination of the only employee outside of Bellum’s specified 19-35-year-old range, and just two days later a 22-year-old is hired. Nevertheless, a significant drawback to this claim is that Bellum denies the alleged quote in the retirement conversation, as well as Caddis admits to having no evidence of Bellum framing her for this discrepancy. To some extent, all of Caddis’ possible age discrimination claims are expended with no sign of any being successful. Caddis has been an employee at Vista Vu for ten years with no hiccups on her
Issue: Did Sarah Bellum, as owner of VV, discriminate against Sally Caddis due to her age?
Facts: Sally Caddis is a 50-year-old woman that has worked at Sarah Bellum’s Vista Vu as a server for 10 years. Sarah Bellum is the sole proprietor of the 25-employee operation “Vista Vu” and it is acknowledged that Vista Vu affects interstate commerce. On Sally Caddis’ job application for Vista Vu she indicated that she was born in 1967 when in fact she was born in 1962. Caddis also stated that she spent time working at a four-star restaurant when in actuality, she never worked at such a restaurant. These discrepancies were not discovered until after the investigation commenced. Seth Anderson, who is mentioned in the deposition, is a 34-year-old …show more content…
1413). Also within Title VII Civil Rights Act is the burden-shifting method which was adopted by courts and often relied on by plaintiffs as a valid claim. The burden-shifting method is where it is discovered that circumstantial evidence is used to cover up one’s true motive for an employment decision (pp. 1414). The age discrimination in employment act (ADEA) prohibits discrimination of employees that are at least 40 years of age (pp.1426). In order for a company to be eligible to commit age discrimination they must: engage in an industry that that affects interstate commerce and employ at least 20 people. In order for an age discrimination to be deemed true, “the plaintiff must prove that age was the “but for” cause of the challenged job position” (pp. 1426). The Montana wrongful discharge from employment act states that it is a wrongful discharge if an employer terminates an employee for: refusing to do something illegal, without good cause, or the employer violates their own policy. “A prima facie case is a case that a plaintiff presents that eliminates the most common nondiscriminatory reasons for the challenging of an employment decision and creates the presumption of a discriminatory reason to the decision” (pp. …show more content…
Caddis, age 50, qualifies for the ADEA as well as Vista Vu for employing 25 employees and affecting interstate commerce. Bellum is claiming that Caddis was laid off with good cause because she stole 700$ from the register one evening and she was discourteous to a potential customer, barring no resemblance to age discrimination. Caddis claimed in her disposition that Bellum did hint at her retiring due to her age and that a change in employment for Vista Vu would be good, but Bellum denied such malicious claims and says the conversation was out of pure curiosity, which deems this argument very unlikely to hold up in court. However, it is convenient that a few weeks following this alleged retirement conversation an unexplainable money discrepancy occurs leading to the termination of the only employee outside of Bellum’s specified 19-35-year-old range, and just two days later a 22-year-old is hired. Nevertheless, a significant drawback to this claim is that Bellum denies the alleged quote in the retirement conversation, as well as Caddis admits to having no evidence of Bellum framing her for this discrepancy. To some extent, all of Caddis’ possible age discrimination claims are expended with no sign of any being successful. Caddis has been an employee at Vista Vu for ten years with no hiccups on her