Case Study Complaints
Case Study Complaints
Holly Crabtree
July 8, 2013
LTC/328
Michele Lardiere
Case Study Complaints
Complaint 1
To Whom It May Concern,
July 8, 2013 I am one of 90 police officers currently employed by Mason, Illinois. The new pay-for-performance plan instituted by the Mason police department is a form of discrimination against seasoned officers. The plan violates me and others 40 or older, according to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) (Brody & Chang, 2008). Officers obtaining higher accomplishments will receive higher biyearly performance evaluations using the pay-for-performance plan. This assessment will not accurately depict a veteran officer’s ability to perform his or her job. The ADEA protects workers 40+ from age discrimination through organization, allowance, or appointment of employees. It is understandable that affective police officers need to be physically capable of performing his or her job, but they also benefit from years of service. The value of physical fitness testing for police officers clearly sets higher standards for officers and benefits younger ones. Experience and job knowledge do not alter the plan’s outcomes (Brody & Chang, 2008). Wage increases and employee benefit packages should not be solely based on physical examination tests. I would like to anonymously register my concerns without creating increased distress to my fellow employees. I hope to see the pay-for-performance plan altered to benefit all officers. My concerns will be shared with the Equal Opportunity Commission if the plan is not altered in a timely manner.
Sincerely,
Armed and Concerned
Complaint 2
To Whom It May Concern,
July 8, 2013 After speaking with you on June 23, 2013, I feel that I have been unfairly evicted from my apartment. You stated in this conversation, you would “have difficulty matching me due to my age”. The Fair Housing Acts of 1968 prevent tenants from eviction because of his or her age (Columbia
Holly Crabtree
July 8, 2013
LTC/328
Michele Lardiere
Case Study Complaints
Complaint 1
To Whom It May Concern,
July 8, 2013 I am one of 90 police officers currently employed by Mason, Illinois. The new pay-for-performance plan instituted by the Mason police department is a form of discrimination against seasoned officers. The plan violates me and others 40 or older, according to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) (Brody & Chang, 2008). Officers obtaining higher accomplishments will receive higher biyearly performance evaluations using the pay-for-performance plan. This assessment will not accurately depict a veteran officer’s ability to perform his or her job. The ADEA protects workers 40+ from age discrimination through organization, allowance, or appointment of employees. It is understandable that affective police officers need to be physically capable of performing his or her job, but they also benefit from years of service. The value of physical fitness testing for police officers clearly sets higher standards for officers and benefits younger ones. Experience and job knowledge do not alter the plan’s outcomes (Brody & Chang, 2008). Wage increases and employee benefit packages should not be solely based on physical examination tests. I would like to anonymously register my concerns without creating increased distress to my fellow employees. I hope to see the pay-for-performance plan altered to benefit all officers. My concerns will be shared with the Equal Opportunity Commission if the plan is not altered in a timely manner.
Sincerely,
Armed and Concerned
Complaint 2
To Whom It May Concern,
July 8, 2013 After speaking with you on June 23, 2013, I feel that I have been unfairly evicted from my apartment. You stated in this conversation, you would “have difficulty matching me due to my age”. The Fair Housing Acts of 1968 prevent tenants from eviction because of his or her age (Columbia
References: Brody, H. M., & Chang, J. (2008). Baby boomers and the ADEA. Employment Relations Today (Wiley), 35(3), 79-84. doi:10.1002/ert.20216 Leap, T., & Kovarsky, I. (1980). The Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Vocational Rehabilitation Act: A Proposed Consolidation. Labor Law Journal, 31(1), 13-26. OPENING DOORS TO FAIR HOUSING: ENFORCING THE AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER PROVISION OF THE FAIR HOUSING ACT THROUGH 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (2010). Columbia Law Review, 110(8), 2135-2184. Walker, R. (2008). Mitigating the Fear of Retaliation: Helping Employees Feel Comfortable Reporting Suspected Misconduct. Journal Of Health Care Compliance, 10(2), 19-73. Young, J. M., & National Council on, D. (2010). Equality of Opportunity: The Making of the Americans with Disabilities Act. National Council On Disability.