Ask a question from expert

Ask now

Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc. Employment Laws

4 Pages607 Words352 Views
   

Added on  2019-09-18

About This Document

The case of OUBRE V. ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. SUPREME C OURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 522 U.S. 422 (1998) discusses the impact of OWBPA and ADEA claims on employment laws. The release cannot bar Oubre's ADEA claim if it does not comply with the OWBPA's requirements. The release violated the ADEA as it did not comply with the requirements of OWBPA. The employer does not have the right to set off against an employee for the money paid to her by the employer.

Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc. Employment Laws

   Added on 2019-09-18

BookmarkShareRelated Documents
OUBRE V. ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INCEMPLOYMENT LAWS
Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc. Employment Laws_1
1Summary It can be stated from the case of OUBRE V. ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. SUPREME C OURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 522 U.S. 422 (1998), that if the release does not comply with the OWBPA's requirements, then it cannot bar Oubre's ADEA claim. It is so because the OWBPA has stated that an employee is not allowed to waive any ADEA claim if that waiver is not knowing and voluntary and also it has been stated that the waiver shall be considered to be knowing and voluntary only if it complies various requirements of the OWBPA. In the present case, the main question was as to the fact whether the release violates the ADEA or not and whether the employer can set off the release or not. In this case, it was found by the Supreme Court that the release had violated the ADEA as it had violated the requirements of OWBPA as the employer (1) did not give Oubre enough time to consider her options, (2) give her seven days to change her mind, or (3) make specific reference to ADEA claims.1.It was held by the Supreme Court that since the release did not comply with the requirements of OWBPA, thus the release cannot prevent Oubre's ADEA claim. It was also held that an employee is not allowed to release an ADEA claim unless such release satisfies the requirements of OWBPA. Thus, it was decided that Oubre's retention of her severance did not amount to a valid release of her ADEA claims since such retention did not comply with the OWBPA any more than the original release did. Thus it can be said that such a release violates the ADEA (Glenn, 2014). 2.It was also held by the Court that the plaintiff’s retention of the money which was given to her by the employer to comply with the terms of the severance agreement did not serveas ratification equivalent to a valid release of ADEA claims. This is because the statute
Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc. Employment Laws_2

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
A Conversation with Lores Oubre
|2
|329
|165

Geoffrey, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax Commission
|9
|3680
|118