Read the attached case study documents and answer the following questions in 650 words or more about Zimpfer v Palm Beach County:
1. Was Mr. Zimpfer a victim of illegal age discrimination according to the ADEA and case law? Why or why not? You may use other court cases to support your position.
2. What action do you recommend that the county take in this matter?
3. What policies should the county adopt to reduce the possibility of age discrimination suits in the future?
1. According to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, employment discrimination against anyone at least 40 years of age in the US is disallowed. The relevant code section is 29 U.S.C. § 631(a). The law does not allow age discrimination in matters of hiring or promotions. This is a blanket ban against age discrimination. In case of Palm Beach County, Mr. Bryce Zimpfer applied for the position of employee relations manager. The department filled the position with Mr. Brad Merriman, aged 33. Even though Brad had less experience than Bryce, he was appointed. This is a case of age based discrimination. Since Brad has been appointed, even though he has less experience than Bryce, the onus lies on the Palm Beach County to establish that there was no age based discrimination. This was established in the Supreme Court case (Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Lab, 554 U.S. 84 (2008)). Only if Palm Beach can establish some other reasonable factor that was responsible for favoring Brad instead of Bryce, a case of age discrimination under ADEA will be established. ...
The answer to this problem explains the Zimpfer v Palm Beach County case study. The references related to the answer are also included.