Recent Development by Gavin J. Reardon
Grocers Supply Company, Inc. (Grocers), a Texas corporation located in east Texas, proposed to revise its employee compensation scheme to calculate employee compensation based on productivity rather than on hours worked. Grocers' workforce, which consisted primarily of long-term employees over the age of forty, opposed this plan. In December 1986, despite contrary advice from Union leadership, the workers went on strike. Grocers subsequently replaced the striking workers. When the workers abandoned their strike and sought to return to work, Grocers informed them that they had been replaced but that they would be considered first for openings.
The workers, in two separate actions, sued, claiming that Grocers replaced them because of their age and that Grocers, therefore, violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). In both cases, Grocers argued that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preempted the ADEA and that the court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction. In both cases, the District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to produce evidence adequate to state a claim under the ADEA. The court, however, reached opposing decisions concerning the exclusivity of the ADEA and the NLRA. The two Grocers Supply cases were consolidated on appeal. While disagreeing with the Britt I court's resolution of preemption, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the suits and resolved the issue of exclusivity. The court held that the ADEA is the exclusive remedy for all age discrimination claims. Britt v. Grocers Supply Co., 978 F.2d 1441 (5th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2929 (1993).
About the Author
Gavin J. Reardon.
Citation
68 Tul. L. Rev. 241 (1993)