preview

Fmla Case Study

Good Essays

The title “corporate officer” suggests a position of power and influence regarding the operation and financial implications of a company, whereas supervisor implies a position of low-level management with limited responsibilities and less involvement in the company overall. Additionally, the term “corporate” suggests liability is only meant to be imposed on those in private employment agencies. A supervisor typically watches over other low-level employees and completes menial tasks and may be a member of a public agency, whereas a corporate officer is involved in influential company decisions and is typically a part of a private company. A “corporate officer” usually holds the position of president, chief executive officer, or even owner of …show more content…

29 C.F.R.§ 1608.1 (2017); 29 U.S.C.§ 2601. Additionally, the FMLA and the FLSA should be interpreted separately since they are materially different and have contrasting purposes; the FMLA aims to ensure equal workplace protection for both genders whereas the FLSA focuses more on labor conditions and commerce. 29 U.S.C.§ 2601; 29 U.S.C.§ 202. This court should consider individual liability under the FMLA analogously to Title VII as opposed to the FLSA for two reasons. First, this Court has found no individual liability under Title VII and should do the same under the FMLA due to their similar underlying purposes. 29 C.F.R.§ 1608.1; 29 U.S.C.§ 2601. Second, the statutory language and central goals of the FMLA are materially different from the FLSA. 29 U.S.C.§ 2601; 29 U.S.C.§ …show more content…

Supp. 2d at 756. While enacting the FMLA, Congress definitively took out “public agency” from the private employer definition, clearing up the ambiguity created by the FLSA. Id. Congress’s decision to depart from the FLSA’s statutory construction when enacting the FMLA demonstrates an intent to keep the two acts separate and not let the previous ambiguity of the FLSA control and guide the FMLA. Id. at

Get Access