Brennan v. Paragon Employment Agency, Inc., 71 Civ. 857.
Decision Date | 26 March 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 71 Civ. 857.,71 Civ. 857. |
Citation | 356 F. Supp. 286 |
Parties | Peter J. BRENNAN as successor to James D. Hodgson, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Plaintiff, v. PARAGON EMPLOYMENT AGENCY, INC., and Evelyn Lane, Evelyn Lane appearing pro se. No appearance by the corporation, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Alfred G. Albert, Acting Sol. of Labor, U. S. Dept. of Labor, Francis V. La Ruffa, Regional Sol., New York City, for plaintiff; David Reines, U. S. Dept. of Labor, of counsel.
Evelyn Lane, pro se.
ORDER DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT
This action for injunctive relief was brought by the Secretary of Labor under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 et seq. At a pretrial conference held before me on February 20, 1973, I granted permission to defendants' counsel to withdraw and to the individual defendant to proceed pro se. I ruled that defendant's position as expressed at the conference be treated as a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Plaintiff has submitted a memorandum in opposition to that motion.
The complaint alleges that defendant Evelyn Lane, who is the President of the defendant employment agency, ran advertisements which violated section 623 (e) of the Act, that attempts at conciliation have been unsuccessful, and that injunctive relief is therefore appropriate. No particulars as to the nature, time or place of the alleged violations appear in the complaint. However at the conference and in plaintiff's memorandum in opposition to this motion, it has been brought out that the offending advertisements were printed in the New York Times and sought "college students", "girls", "boys"1 and "June graduates" to work for Ms. Lane at her employment agency.
Section 623(e) provides:
An interpretative bulletin issued by the Labor Department construes section 4(e) as follows:
Section 623(f) of the Act provides:
The word "employer" is defined in the Act as "a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has twenty-five or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year: . . ." 29 U.S.C.A. § 630(b). In contrast, the definition of any employment agency does not exclude even the smallest business. § 630(c). While the legislative history is silent as to the reasons for the distinction, it may fairly be explained as a recognition by the Congress of the disparate responsibilities and needs of the two categories.
In the instant case, the advertisements sought people to work for defendant Lane herself at her own office. She therefore placed the advertisements in her capacity as an employer, and not as an employment agent. The complaint does not allege that Ms. Lane met the statutory definition of an "employer". For this reason alone, the motion to dismiss may be granted.
There is, however,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Rogers v. Exxon Research and Engineering Company
...of the ADEA, although relatively few, agree that the Act shares Title VII's "make whole" purpose. In Brennan v. Paragon Employment Agency, Inc., 356 F.Supp. 286, 288 (S.D.N.Y.1973), aff'd mem., 489 F.2d 752 (2d Cir. 1974), Judge Knapp The Act was intended to alleviate the serious economic a......
-
Douglas v. American Cyanamid Co.
...suffering of people between the ages of 40 and 65 caused by widespread job discrimination against them." Brennan v. Paragon Employment Agency, Inc., 356 F.Supp. 286, 288 (S.D.N.Y. 1973), aff'd mem., 489 F.2d 752 (2d Cir. 1974) (emphasis 3 The rationale of the First Circuit in Vazquez differ......
-
Herman v. United Broth. of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union No. 971
...definition of employer, it is immaterial that the agency independently met definition of "employment agency"); Brennan v. Paragon Employment Agency, 356 F.Supp. 286 (S.D.N.Y.1973) (employment agency); Shepherdson v. Local 401, 823 F.Supp. 1245 (E.D.Pa.1993) (citing Childs ) (union); Phelps ......
-
Scaglione v. Chappaqua Central School Dist.
...the few that do almost invariably involve an entity that is indisputably an "employment agency." See, e.g., Brennan v. Paragon Employment Agency, Inc., 356 F.Supp. 286 (S.D.N.Y.1973). Given the lack of guidance from the courts of this circuit (and others), this Court will analyze the variou......