NYT editorial: A Verdict for Workers, for a Change (US Supreme Court)

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/opinion/02sun2.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Published: March 2, 2008

The Supreme Court ruled last week that a group of employees suing for age discrimination should get their day in court even though they filed their complaint on the wrong form. The decision is noteworthy because it suggests that this court could be pulling back from what has often seemed like a knee-jerk inclination to rule for corporations over workers and consumers.

A group of couriers over the age of 40 sued Federal Express, claiming it tried to push out older workers. The issue was whether they submitted a proper complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within the legal time limit. FedEx claimed the couriers filed the wrong form, but the court ruled, 7 to 2, that an intake questionnaire and a signed affidavit — which the E.E.O.C. considered a valid complaint — met its “permissive standard” for what was acceptable.

It is surprising and welcome to see the court apply any sort of permissive standard, considering how it ruled in a similar case just last year. Through a tortured and illogical reading of the law, the court ruled, 5 to 4, that a Goodyear employee missed the deadline for filing a complaint that she was paid less than male colleagues.

That was one of a series of rulings in recent years that stretched the law to come out against little-guy parties. In one egregious decision last year, the court ignored its precedents to hold that an inmate lost the right to challenge his murder conviction because he missed a deadline — even though he had filed the appeal by the day the federal district judge (mistakenly) told him to.

The FedEx ruling could be an aberration, or it could mark a new direction. The justices may have been chastened by the enormous criticism of the Goodyear ruling from Congress and the public. (The House has passed a bill reversing it, and the Senate may soon follow.) They may also be reacting — as the court has been known to do — to shifting political winds. Voters in this election year do not appear to favor the blind deference to corporate power that has been a theme of the last seven years.

FULL article at link.

[muntrv]

1. Jeffrey Fisher is smarter than John Roberts.

[rpannier]

2. We can only hope