Question

Distribution, Inc., employed Quintak, to run its tire mounting and distribution operation in Des Moines, Iowa. Robert Chalfant worked for Quintak as a second shift supervisor at Titan. He suffered a heart attack in 1992 and underwent heart bypass twerp in 1997. He also had arthritis. In Filly 2002, Titan Chalfant applied to work at Titan. On his application he described himself as disabled. After a physical exam, Titan physician concluded that Chalfant could work in cuurent capacity, and he was notified that he would be hired. Despite the notice Nadis Baruch-, a Titan employee, wrote not pass px at the top of Chalfants's application, and he was not hired. This work Involved walking up to five miles a day and lifting more weight than he had at Titan. In September Titan eliminated its second shift, Chalfant filed a suit in the federal district court against Titan, in part, under the Act (ADA). Titan argued that it because he did not pass the physical,
but no one-including Baruck-could explain why she had written 'not pass px" on his application. Later, Titan claimed that Chalfant was not hired because the entire second shift was going to be eliminated. /Chalfant v Titan Distribution, Inc.,
(a) What must Chalfant establish to make his case under the MM? Can he meet these requirements? Explain.
(b) In employment-discrimination cases, punitive dam-ages can be appropriate when an employer acts with malice or reckless Indifference toward an employee's protected rights. Would an award of punitive damages to Chalfant be appropriate in this case? Discuss.


$1.99
Sales0
Views41
Comments0
  • CreatedJune 18, 2014
  • Files Included
Post your question
5000