Table of Contents
Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 563 U.S. 1 (2011)
U.S. Supreme court
The case citation is 563 U.S. 1 (2011)
The petitioner Kasten has brought the anti-retaliation, which suits the former manager and the respondent. The manager was an employer and Saint- Gobain was the respondent. The Fair Labour Standards Act of 1938 states the minimum wage, hour and the pay rules for overtime. In addition, the act prohibits the discrimination of discharge without any notice period and it helps the employees who cannot launch any complaint against this. In order to receive the paychecks, the employees of Saint- Gobain need to swipe in as well as swipe out within a time clock.
Kasten said that the reason was the location of clocks, due to this; the employees need to wear the safety equipment before them swiping. As a consequence, Kasten claimed that Saint- Gobain avoided its staffs within twenty minutes along with two and half hours pay in a week. Saint-Gobain claimed that the staff handbook contained the unsuccessfulness comply with clock polity, which results in termination and disciplinarians. Kasten received various actions of disciplines related to punching in and punching out of the clock.
According to Kasten, on February 13, 2006, he received a separate warning on his swiping in and wiping out of the clock. Moreover, he received another warning letter on August 31, 2006, for the further violation of the time clock. The third warning letter on November 10, 2006, he received, which contained further violation. However, Kasten verbally made complaints, he again complained at the meeting. He claimed that although he launched a complaint against the employees that they were not able to pay for the spending time. On the other hand, Saint- Gobain will lose when he sued the company.
However, he denied that the employer Kasten launched verbal complaints on the placement of time. On the date, December 5, 2007, the employer Kasten had to fill a for the Western District of Wisconsin lawsuit in the District Court of the United States. He claimed that Saint Gobain terminated Kasten for oral complaints. This was for the violation for Fair Labour Standard Act. The District Court had granted the motion of SaintGobain for the judgment of Saint Gobain.
The Supreme Court made an argument that they need to take a decision in the favor of Saint Gobain, who would severely take the disadvantages the employees those are could not make any separate complaints.
The National Employment Law Project agreed with the United States that argued that the illiterate employees made a greater position of the workforce in America (Supreme.justia.com, 2011).They will not capable to launch any complaint in the written procedure. Moreover, they are afraid of the written complaint, which consisted of enough skill in language and complained to their employer about the fact.
The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights under Law consists of the holding decision.
The delegation of the enforcement power of the administrator of federal agency investigated the phrases given in a degree of the weight. The committee for equal employment opportunity set out the opinion in the compliance policy as well as in various briefs. The suggestion reflects careful consideration, which is not "post hoc rationalization". The court would not use to consider the alternative claim of Saint Gobain that provision applies for the complaints filed by the government.
The Fair Labour Standards Act of 1938 states the minimum wage, hour and the pay rules for overtime. In addition, the act prohibits the discrimination of discharge without any notice period and it helps the employees who cannot launch any complaint against this.As stated by Turner (2016), the act provides the enforcement of the minimum standard on the “Information and complaints received from the employees”. The national Labour relation act gives the provision which is interpreted of the protection of employees within an organization. Moreover, the act also provides equal opportunity and right to the employees to lodge complaint either in written form or oral complaint. Discrimination is also prohibited within this law based on which the equality is guaranteed. In addition, the law also ensures health and safety as well as minimum standard of living of the employees.
The Supreme Court will take the decision if the workers, who used to launch the verbal complaints, are safe from the retaliation of employers under the section 215(a)(3) of the Fair Labour Standard Act. The employer Kasten said that section 215(a)(3) provides the protection against the verbal complaints as well as the separate complaints about the counter of Saint Gobain. Moreover, Saint Gobain argued that section 215(a)(3) provides the protection of separate complaints launched to the government authority.
The United States said that the decision in the favor of Saint Gobain will give the disadvantage of the workers, who are not able to complain in written. The employees are weak in English and with low income. The National Employment Law project took a decision to agree with the low income and illiterate workers. The agreement of the United States made up a large portion of employees. Moreover, The National Employment Law project decided that the workers are also not able to file separate complaints about the reason for their poor skill in English.
The Lawyers committee for Rights under Law consists of the decision which holds that the verbal complaints, which do not provide the protection. As opined by McCloskey & Levinson (2016), this will discourage the employees by reporting the grievances, which is out of their fear from oral complaints.The Equal Employment Advisory Council made a decision, which protects the verbal complaints under this law. This would support the employee’s capability, which causes the hesitation to take a decision.
The American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organizationargue that it will protect workers to make any kind of oral complaints. Along with that, it argues the protection of verbal complaints, which helps to promote dispute resolutions in the organization.
The analysis of the statutory phrase, which depends on the statutory case, considers the context as well as purpose. As mentioned by Tillman (2017), the interpretation will determine the objective of the act basis. The labor condition should be maintained as per the law in order to preserve the health and safety, productivity and efficiency as well as the minimum standard of living of the employees.
The enforcement power of the agencies of federal administration provides the employees the degree of weight according to their experience and phases. In this regard the sectary of the laborers can file a complaint in terms of either written or oral complaint. As opined by Born & Rutledge (2018), the commission of equal employment opportunity provides an equal opinion for every employee based on the compliance policy and other briefs. The court of the United State also not considered the alternatives of Saint Gobain which claims that the provision of anti-retaliation is applied only for the complaints, filled by government.
The Fair Labour Standards Act of 1938 states the minimum wage, hour and the pay rules for overtime. In order to receive the paychecks, the employees of Saint- Gobain need to swipe in as well as swipe out within a time clock under this act. Kasten claimed that Saint Gobain terminated Kasten for oral complaints. As stated by Tankard &Paluck (2017), this was for the violation for Fair Labour Standard Act. The act provides the enforcement of the minimum standard on the “Information and complaints received from the employees”. Along with that, the employer Kasten said that section 215(a)(3) provides the protection against the verbal complaints as well as the separate complaints about the counter of Saint Gobain. Saint Gobain argued that section 215(a)(3) provides the protection of separate complaints launched to the government authority. Saint Gobain argued that no differences are appreciated in the cases, where the government advances the position, which is wrong. As mentioned by Enns & Wohlfarth (2017), the FLSA composes the liability of criminal to the violators; Saint Gobain provoked the law to the appetite for strict construction. It is not only in the context of criminal but also in civil cases
Born, G. B., & Rutledge, P. B. (2018). International civil litigation in United States courts. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1149&context=books Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
Enns, P. K., & Wohlfarth, P. C. (2017). Making sense of the Supreme Court—public opinion relationship. Handbook of judicial behavior. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from https://gvpt.umd.edu/sites/gvpt.umd.edu/files/pubs/ennswohlfarthchapter_final.pdf Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
McCloskey, R. G., & Levinson, S. (2016). The American supreme court. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.441.1988&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=57 Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
Supreme.justia.com , (2011) US Supreme Court, Retrieved from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/1/Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
Tankard, M. E., &Paluck, E. L. (2017). The effect of a Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychological science, 28(9), 1334-1344. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3875/09456581f4f69c7d1a448a04da35ac2c0210.pdf Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
Tillman, S. B. (2017). Business Transactions and President Trump's Emoluments Problem. Retrieved from: http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Tillman_FINAL.pdf Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
Turner, A. (2016). The business case for racial equity. National Civic Review, 105(1), 21-29. Retrieved from https://altarum.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-publication-files/WKKellogg_Business-Case-Racial-Equity_Mississippi-Report_2018.pdf Retrieved on 12th March, 2019
