Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Background

Relevant Laws

Summary

  • In 2003, Gross being 54 was reassigned from Claims Administration Director to Claims Project Coordinator.

  • A younger employee that Gross supervised prior took over Gross' old position.

  • Gross' pay stayed the same amount.

  • This caused Gross to sue FBL for age discrimination.
  • Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)

  • Title VII was amended to explicitly authorize discrimination claims in which an improper consideration was a "motivating factor" for an adverse employment decision.
  • The court has different construction of the same critical language in the ADEA and Title VII.

  • The court rejects "but-for" in the Price Waterhouse Case.

  • Yet in Gross' case, the court resurrects the standard.

History

  • Jury agreed with Gross.

  • The 8th circuit reversed the decision.

  • U.S Supreme Court reviews the ruling.

  • The trail was told that:

-Gross found age as a motivating factor

-FBL demoted him regardless of his age

Arguments

  • In Price Waterhouse V. Hopskins the court determined that if the plaintiffs membership in a protected class had something to do with the decision, the defendant may avoid finding a liability.

  • Though Title VII was amended, the court maked sure to not add them to ADEA claims.

Gross V. FBL Financial Services, Inc.

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi