Emory v. United Air Lines, Inc.
405 U.S. App. D.C. 378
| D.C. Cir. | 2013Background
- FTEPA repealed the Age 60 Rule and created a new Age 65 Rule with two nonretroactivity exemptions.
- Nonretroactivity exemptions: (A) in employment on enactment date as RFDCM, or (B) newly hired after enactment without credit for prior seniority.
- Protection for compliance bars liability for actions taken in conformance with FTEPA or the prior Age 60 Rule.
- Adams and Emory suits challenged nonretroactivity, compliance protections, and FAA implementation; district courts ruled for defendants.
- Court held FTEPA constitutional and interpreted exemptions; mootness analysis concluded some claims moot after five years.
- Appeals affirmed district court judgments on claims not moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness of Adams/Emory claims | Adams argues ongoing live controversy and request for relief. | Mootness due to five-year window; relief unobtainable. | Mootness governs some claims; some claims reach merits via Steel Co. exception. |
| Constitutional validity of nonretroactivity | Nonretroactivity violates equal protection and due process. | Rational-basis fit to preserve workplace harmony and labor relations. | Nonretroactivity passes rational-basis review. |
| Bill of attainder analysis | FTEPA imposes punishment on over-60 pilots. | Statute provides partial benefit, not punishment; aims to protect labor interests. | No bill of attainder; no punitive intent under factors. |
| Interpretation of § 44729(e)(1)(A) vs (B) | ‘In such operations’ modifies carrier, expanding exemptions. | ‘In such operations’ modifies ‘that air carrier’; narrow reading favored. | Court adopts Emory’s reading; exemption limited to RFDCM serving in Part 121 on enactment date. |
| ADEA claims and safe harbor | ALPA/United violated ADEA by improper interpretation. | Safe harbor bars liability for interpretations conformance. | ADEA claims dismissed; safe harbor applies to both employer and union. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knox v. Servs. Employees Int'l Union, Local 1000, 132 S. Ct. 2277 (2012) (jurisdictional mootness considerations and concrete interest in outcome)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1998) (exception to jurisdiction when merits resolved in companion case)
- Foretich v. United States, 351 F.3d 1198 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (three-factor bill of attainder framework)
- Nixon v. Adm’r of Gen. Servs., 433 U.S. 425 (1977) (congressional intent and punitive purposes in legislative action)
- DelCostello v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (1983) (borrowing statute of limitations for federally mediated claims)