Zimpfer vs. Palm Beach County Case

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 1339
  • Published : December 7, 2011
Open Document
Text Preview
Individual Assignment #1: “Zimpfer vs. Palm Beach County”.

By

MGMT 6374

HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

November 2, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

INTRODUCTION1
Critical Issues1
ADEA Requirements and Prima Facie Evidence
ADEA Requirements for Conclusive Evidence and Relevant Court Cases

Critical Evaluation of the I/O Psychologist Report 2

Potential Additional Evidence Needed for Zimpfer3
Potential Rebuttal Evidence Needed for the County3
Conclusions 4
Recommendations to the County
Future Preventive Actions Needed

Introduction
The “Zimpfer vs. Palm Beach County” case is about a lawsuit filed by Mr. Bryce Zimpfer against Palm Beach County alleging a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Mr. Zimpher, age 52, has worked for the county’s employee relations area and this employment had lasted for 16 years. There was a vacancy which was advertised by the county for the position of employee relations manager, a position which Mr. Zimpfer decided to apply for. After considering all the applications, the county chose a candidate, Mr. Brad Merriman, age 33, to fill this position.

Mr. Zimpfer then decided to file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EOOC) and hired an attorney, Ms. Lynn Szymoniak to pursue his case. Armed with a favorable report from an I/O psychologist, Dr. Marcy Josephs, Ms. Szymoniak is now attempting to reach a settlement with Palm Beach County’s legal representatives.

Critical Issues
ADEA Requirements and Prima Facie Evidence
In order to establish a prima facie case against Palm Beach County, Mr. Zimpfer and his attorney would have to provide evidence that would meet certain requirements. The requirements are: 1) proving that Mr. Zimpfer is older than 39 and therefore protected under the ADEA; 2) Mr. Zimpfer is able to perform satisfactorily at some absolute or relative...
tracking img