+1-817-968-5551
+61-488-839-671
+44-7480-542904About Expert
Key Topics
Labor & Employment Law Case brief
Case Name
(GREEN v. BRENNAN, POSTMASTER GENERAL , 2016)
Facts
A postal employee applied for promotion but was denied due to the discrimination. He informally filed charge against his employer through Equal Employment Opportunity. Employer contended of a criminal charge against the employee. A settlement agreement was signed between the employer and the employee and the employee chose to resign. Several days after resigning and signing the agreement, the employee filed constructive discharge through Equal Employment Opportunity against the employer. District Court ordered in favor of the employer due to the fact that the employee’s allegations were not within time and is barred by limitation. The Supreme Court of United States was in disagreement with the above order and held that limitation period started from the date the employee signed the resignation.
Issue
Whether, under discrimination law, the filing period for constructive discharge run from the time the employer’s last alleged discriminatory act surfaced or from the period the employee signed the resignation.
Holding
Supreme Court, held that the 45day period of limitation for the constructive discharge claim, runs from the date the employee resigns and this period of limitation have started on the day when the employee handed over the notice of resignation to the employer.
Rationale
For a claim for constructive discharge, the limitation period of 45 days will run from the day the employee resigned, since then only the cause of action arises, after the resignation of the employee.
Case Name
(Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, 2016)
Facts
Plaintiffs alleged, the making of the financial contributions for union, for the agency shop arrangement is in violation of their rights to free speech and association under the First (First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition, 1791) and (The Fourteenth Amendment- Privileges and Immunities Clause- Due Process ). The plaintiffs contended that their contributions towards the union will be a violation of their freedom of speech and expression and also is in derogation to the due process of law.
Issue
Whether, public-sector agency shop arrangements are in violation of the (First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition, 1791), which provides protection for the freedom of speech and assembly.
Holding
The Court held that the precedents which the plaintiffs suggested are in itself controlling enough and can compel the non-members to pay dues for collective bargaining services, if that do not include the political aspects and further held that this move is not at all unconstitutional and is not in derogation with the (First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition, 1791) and the (The Fourteenth Amendment- Privileges and Immunities Clause- Due Process ), and hence is constitutionally valid.
Rationale
The rationale behind this decision is that the agency- fee arrangements the public-sector agency shop arrangements is not in violation of the (First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition, 1791)which protects for freedom of speech and assembly and furthermore, (First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition, 1791)do not prohibit the practice of requiring public employees for opting out of subsidizing nonchargeable speech rather than to affirmatively consent and hence is not inconsistent with the (The Fourteenth Amendment- Privileges and Immunities Clause- Due Process ).
Place Order For A Top Grade Assignment Now
We have some amazing discount offers running for the students
Place Your OrderReferences
First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition. (1791). First Amendment- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, 578 US _ (2016) (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2016).
GREEN v. BRENNAN, POSTMASTER GENERAL , 136 S.Ct. 1769 (SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 2016).
The Fourteenth Amendment- Privileges and Immunities Clause- Due Process . (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, 578 US _ (2016) (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2016).
GREEN v. BRENNAN, POSTMASTER GENERAL , 136 S.Ct. 1769 (SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 2016).
The Fourteenth Amendment- Privileges and Immunities Clause- Due Process . (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
Give your grades a boost
Just share your requirements and get customized solutions on time.
-
1,168,768 Orders
-
4.9/5 Overall Rating
-
5,052 Experts
