Oberg v. Allied Van Lines Inc., 17 EBC 2083 (7th Cir. 1994)

Article Abstract:

Allied Van Lines Inc. laid off over 60 employees, who were offered a special severance benefits in return for waiving all future claims against the company, including claims under the Older Workers Benefits Protection Act (OWBPA). The waiver contract stipulated that in case of breach, the workers should return all severance benefits. After receiving the last severance payments, some workers filed suit against Allied for age discrimination. The district court declared the waiver contract null and void because Allied failed to comply with relevant OWBPA provisions. The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling.

TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, Support Activities for Transportation, Transportation industry, Allied Van Lines Inc.

---

Wamsley v. Champlin Refining and Chemicals Inc., 11 F. 3d 534 (5th Cir. 1993)

Article Abstract:

A group of former workers at Champlin Refining and Chemicals Inc.'s plant in Irving, TX, who lost their jobs in 1990 sued Champlin for violations of provisions of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Champlin argued that it gave the workers the required 45 days under the Older Workers Benefits Protection Act to decide whether or not to accept a waiver of claims in return for financial compensation. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Champlin, saying that the workers' failure to return the compensation constituted agreement to the waiver of claims under the ADEA.

Chemical industry, Champlin Refining and Chemicals Inc.

---

DiBiase v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 17 EBC 2593 (E.D. Penn. 1994)

Article Abstract:

A 51-yr.-old employee at Smithkline Beecham was laid off as part of company downsizing after a merger with another pharmaceutical company. The employee was given a choice between a standard separation benefit plan and an enhanced separation benefit plan if he signs a general release of all claims against Smithkline. The employee refused to sign and sued the company for discrimination on the basis of age, since younger employees received the same benefits as older employees, although older employees released more claims. The district court ruled in favor of the employee.

Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing, Pharmaceutical preparations, Pharmaceutical industry, Drugs, SmithKline Beecham Corp. (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Nazay v. Miller, 949 F.2d 1323, 14 EBC 1953 (3rd Cir. 1991). State workers' compensation laws
• Abstracts: PM Group Life Insurance Co. v. Western Growers Assurance Trust, 953 F.2d 543, 14 EBC 2233 (9th Cir. 1992). Holder v. Prudential Insurance Co., 951 F.2d 89, 14 EBC 2289 (5th Cir. 1992)
• Abstracts: Common sense approach offered as a way to deal with compliance of 404(c). The public portfolio: are the management demands really different?
• Abstracts: Resume fraud: lies, omissions and exaggerations. Global inpats - don't let them surprise you. Workers take leave of job stress
• Abstracts: Pension actuaries model the future. Simplification. Technology can't replace qualitative due diligence

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.