Employment Law

p Case AnalysisPollis v . the New School for broad investigate (2nd Cir . 1997Issue : Whether there was sufficiency of evidence in sculptural relief of the venire sfinding of wilfulness , with respect to the plaintiff s ravishment of the append rightAct , in concedeing Pollis less than comparable staminate person talent membersF spells : effeminate employee sued the university where she was a full tenuredprofessor for invasion of the Equal cave in Act , alleging frowardness in respect totheir actions . Judgment for employee was apt(p) by District Court pursuant to p dialog concussion verdict , awarding damages to the employee . Review was granted by theCourt of AppealsDecision : The Court of Appeals held that the event that employee had complainedof the discrepancy between her afford and that of male professors on numerousoccasions and the employer had failed to rectify the situation was sufficient toshow willful encroachment of the Equal Pay Act . The Court affirmed the findings ofthe instrument panel that the New School s usurpation of said act was willful or reckless , butvacated the judgment and remand for recalculation of the award . The awardshould liberty chit water been siced to the amount of damages incurred within the square offationsperiod . The Court of Appeals qualifying by reversal the award of damages for intentional sexuality discrimination . place upright IN tell , VACATED IN PARTAnd REMANDEDPollis showed at trial that her salary for the past xix years had been less than that paid to male professors doing the same work .

It was on the solid ground that the venire found in kick upstairs of Pollis and awarded her damages , command that the New School for Social Research had willfully or recklessly violated the Equal Pay ActAn employer whose employees are flying field to the Fair Labor Standards has violated that act if it pays wages to an employee at less than that paid to employees of the opposite devolve on for tote up work on the job , `the performance of which requires equal scientific discipline , effort and responsibility and which are performed under equal working(a) conditions (Pollis v The New SchoolIt is not necessary for the plaintiff to see that the difference in pay was based on gender discrimination and the New School , in this incase do not contest the sufficiency of evidence in support of a colza of the lawThis case was argued under the ` go on Violation doctrine . The District Court had held that the statut ory limit of three years for willful or reckless violation was not applicable in this case due to the detail that the defendant s actions were an ongoing pattern of violation This doctrine allows a plaintiff , in some cases , to recover on the rump that the violation was continuous . If there is an ongoing policy of violation and it is a part of an illegal activity which precedes the limitations period , the ` sojourn Violation doctrine can be arguedA claim of pay discrimination based on gender is unlike ramify claims of ongoing discriminatory behavior in that it is not sense datum overt act , but rather...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay