Posted July 22, 2021
kohlrak: Best example is the final bit of the request. The use several bullet points to ask for compensatory damages, 2 to ask for punitive damages. It's like how in highschool you can use passive voice to extend the word count of an essay that you don't have enough information to meet the minimum word count.
Jemolk: I don't see what you're referring to, unless it's the first two points here. Under the section heading "Prayer for Relief," the initial points are: 1. compensatory and punitive damages, 2. unpaid wages, liquidated damages, and other remedies and penalties available under the Equal Pay Act. Is this what you're referring to? If so, then I have to disagree. Legalese is extremely picky about wording. It needs to be, in order to even attempt to eliminate linguistic ambiguity. Simply put, these are (admittedly subtly) different requests, and the latter is not neatly folded into the former, even if in everyday conversation it could be.
1. Compensatory and punitive damages;
2. Unpaid wages, liquidated damages, and other remedies and penalties available under the Equal Pay Act;
3. Injuctive relief;
4. Declaratory relief;
5. Equitable relief, including but not limited to reinstatement and/or front pay, pay adjustments, backpay, lost wages and benefits (including base pay, incentive pay, pension benefits and awards), in an amount to be proven at trial;
6. Prejudgement interest, as required by law;
7. Attourney's fees and costs to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing; and
8. Other relief the Court deems to be just and proper.
One of my favorite things is how the SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION implicitly makes one of the presumed plaintiffs a defendant. You know, Chief People Officer Claudine Naughton, whom, if you look her up, has HR for AIG in her employment history, implying to me that part of the "People department" would be HR? I would love to hear her have to take the stand and claim she was paid unfairly compared to all the male officers in "comparable positions" and then have to take the stand again and defend her department's actions, and somehow explain how she's part of this frat group that descriminates on female outsiders like her. Maybe i'm just making too many assumptions, here, but this looks like good fun.
EDIT: And imagine right now saying "white men" in a lawsuit. This sounds like something out of a comedy routine about modern politics. Maybe they should've left the race out of this, just sayin'.
Post edited July 22, 2021 by kohlrak