See the attached file.
3. Local Law Paper: Employer-employee relationship in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Prepare a paper in which you describe the employer-employee relationship in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the differences between the "employment at will" doctrine in the states and its application according to the P.R. Civil Code's articles and P.R. Supreme Court's cases presented. In your paper, there must be reference to the specific facts of the cases portrayed, issues solved and legal grounds regarding the assigned topic. You must discuss the concepts of classification among employees, independent contractors and you must explain the remedies available for the employees in cases of wrongful discharge pursuant to Puerto Rico's Law #80 and the P.R. Supreme Court cases. You shall demonstrate that you read the cases posted on Go to Class.
Law No. 100 was amended to remove the cap of 70 years of age, meaning that before only people up to 70 were protected, but now there is no higher limit on age where an individual would be protected in age discrimination cases. Due to this, employers now use skill and capabilities as a criterion on which to base how a worker performs and not age. The change also signaled the fact that age is not a decisive factor when it comes to whether or not a worker can perform the tasks of his job.
Furthermore, Article 3 of Law No. 100, LPRA 29 sec. 148 prohibit the dismissal of an ...
Age law discrimination law of case discussed
Employment Law - Age Discrimination
Julie is a 58 year old engineer of Asian decent. She has mentioned to several co-workers that she may retire in December. Julie is next in line for training which would prepare her for a promotion. The training is scheduled for October. Julie's supervisor, John over hears a group of employees discussing Julie's possible retirement and decides to schedule another employee for the training. John approaches Jack, a 25 year old white male employee, and informs Jack that he will be attending the training. John tells Jack that although Julie is next in line for the training and promotion, sending her to the training would be a waste of time because she is close to retirement and most employees have a difficult time understanding her English. Julie learns that she will not be attending the training and she complains to her supervisor, who tells her he can select any employee he chooses.
1. Does Julie have any claims that she can assert against her employer? If so, what are they?
2. What laws, if any would afford protection to Julie?