It\’s unfortunate Trump opted for an economical settlement. There\’a always one mal-content who has to take umbrage with something. Trump has no obligation I\’m aware of to accept any applicant. Fact of the matter is, he\’s looking for a young apprentice who has fresh ideas and long career ahead of him/her. Not some 51 year old who\’s dis-satisfied with his job and has nothing better to do than complain. If this guy was so good why isn\’t he already a millionaire? I don\’t blame Trump for passing on this bozo.
This is just another sad commentary on how litigious our society has become. I mean c\’mon – it\’s not even a real job – its a freakin game show! When is country going to wake up and adopt the rule that the loser pays all attorney fees. That would stop this crap.
Just cause I was 86…sued \’em, too. James Suxalot took my case and he won me $5.00 pain & suffrin…course he took $4.00 but the main thing is I tied-up the court for 6 years and I\’m proud of it!
This is as bad as that guy who sued the LA Dodgers for their handing pink bags to mothers on Mother\’s Day, because he didn\’t get one. It discriminated against \”non-mothers.\” Right.
If it\’s not about the money, how come the settlement was agreeable to all sides? Means to me that money exchanged hands. I\’m pretty sure the settlement information will leak out some time & we will see what kind of bozo this guy really is & how Trump capitulated!
Two things disgust me about this. First, why is a 49 year old man trying to be an \”apprentice\”? If this guy has an actionable lawsuit, it is against those who educated him. Second, the lawyer that represented this clown needs to have his gonads slammed in a car door repeatedly. Without knowing this lawyer or what he/she looks like, I\’m betting there would be a strong resemblence to John(yes, I\’m a \”have\” in a \”have not\” world)Edwards, who was only too happy to take 33 1/3 of the money. Finally, my daddy always told me that whenever anybody says it ain\’t about the money, it\’s ALWAYS about the money.
\”The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age. The ADEA\’s protections apply to both employees and job applicants. Under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment — including, but not limited to, hiring, firing, promotion, layoff, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training.
It is also unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices that discriminate based on age or for filing an age discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under the ADEA.
The ADEA applies to employers with 20 or more employees, including state and local governments. It also applies to employment agencies and to labor organizations, as well as to the federal government.\”
OK, so only two people were over 40. They weren\’t discriminated against… but this guy was? Maybe Trump just didn\’t like him. He sounds like a petty money grubber to me. That\’s making an assumption, but it doesn\’t seem like that far of a stretch. If there hadn\’t been ANY over 40 people accepted onto the show, in my mind, he would have had a better case.
Now, it also says the ADEA applies to employers with 20 or more employees. So, is it 20 or more people (apprentices) on the show? Helping with the show (hair, makeup, lighting, producers, etc)? I have never watched the show, but do they start off with more than 20 people? Hmm… yes, he sued because he knew the Don would settle. It\’s cheaper for Trump to settle.
Anyway, my two cents (or $10 million or whatever)…
I believe the 20 or more employees or more would apply to the Trump Organization.
The \”applicants\” are actually interviewing for a job with Trump\’s organization. So I would think they would have to look at his organization, not the show.
I appreciate your comment. I mean that sincerely as well. :)
I can definitely see where you are coming from in your response. They are interviewing to be an employee of his company- it\’s just a HUGE hurdle in the interviewing process. Imagine if all companies worked that way. I wonder if one of the lawyers tried to spin it the way I said… you know \”Well, technically, they are on this show and there aren\’t more than 20 people… blah, blah, blah…\”. It reminds me of the whole \”I spilled hot coffee in my lap and now I am going to sue.\”
Anyway, thanks for the clarification on the issue. Have a great holiday weekend!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
It\’s unfortunate Trump opted for an economical settlement. There\’a always one mal-content who has to take umbrage with something. Trump has no obligation I\’m aware of to accept any applicant. Fact of the matter is, he\’s looking for a young apprentice who has fresh ideas and long career ahead of him/her. Not some 51 year old who\’s dis-satisfied with his job and has nothing better to do than complain. If this guy was so good why isn\’t he already a millionaire? I don\’t blame Trump for passing on this bozo.
This is just another sad commentary on how litigious our society has become. I mean c\’mon – it\’s not even a real job – its a freakin game show! When is country going to wake up and adopt the rule that the loser pays all attorney fees. That would stop this crap.
Just cause I was 86…sued \’em, too. James Suxalot took my case and he won me $5.00 pain & suffrin…course he took $4.00 but the main thing is I tied-up the court for 6 years and I\’m proud of it!
This is as bad as that guy who sued the LA Dodgers for their handing pink bags to mothers on Mother\’s Day, because he didn\’t get one. It discriminated against \”non-mothers.\” Right.
If it\’s not about the money, how come the settlement was agreeable to all sides? Means to me that money exchanged hands. I\’m pretty sure the settlement information will leak out some time & we will see what kind of bozo this guy really is & how Trump capitulated!
Two things disgust me about this. First, why is a 49 year old man trying to be an \”apprentice\”? If this guy has an actionable lawsuit, it is against those who educated him. Second, the lawyer that represented this clown needs to have his gonads slammed in a car door repeatedly. Without knowing this lawyer or what he/she looks like, I\’m betting there would be a strong resemblence to John(yes, I\’m a \”have\” in a \”have not\” world)Edwards, who was only too happy to take 33 1/3 of the money. Finally, my daddy always told me that whenever anybody says it ain\’t about the money, it\’s ALWAYS about the money.
Hear Hear! I think you made the point perfectly and as JohnM also noted, if it ain\’t about money, why was this filed at all?
yourself?
\”The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age. The ADEA\’s protections apply to both employees and job applicants. Under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment — including, but not limited to, hiring, firing, promotion, layoff, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training.
It is also unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices that discriminate based on age or for filing an age discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under the ADEA.
The ADEA applies to employers with 20 or more employees, including state and local governments. It also applies to employment agencies and to labor organizations, as well as to the federal government.\”
OK, so only two people were over 40. They weren\’t discriminated against… but this guy was? Maybe Trump just didn\’t like him. He sounds like a petty money grubber to me. That\’s making an assumption, but it doesn\’t seem like that far of a stretch. If there hadn\’t been ANY over 40 people accepted onto the show, in my mind, he would have had a better case.
Now, it also says the ADEA applies to employers with 20 or more employees. So, is it 20 or more people (apprentices) on the show? Helping with the show (hair, makeup, lighting, producers, etc)? I have never watched the show, but do they start off with more than 20 people? Hmm… yes, he sued because he knew the Don would settle. It\’s cheaper for Trump to settle.
Anyway, my two cents (or $10 million or whatever)…
I believe the 20 or more employees or more would apply to the Trump Organization.
The \”applicants\” are actually interviewing for a job with Trump\’s organization. So I would think they would have to look at his organization, not the show.
Thanks for the insight, Jewel.
I appreciate your comment. I mean that sincerely as well. :)
I can definitely see where you are coming from in your response. They are interviewing to be an employee of his company- it\’s just a HUGE hurdle in the interviewing process. Imagine if all companies worked that way. I wonder if one of the lawyers tried to spin it the way I said… you know \”Well, technically, they are on this show and there aren\’t more than 20 people… blah, blah, blah…\”. It reminds me of the whole \”I spilled hot coffee in my lap and now I am going to sue.\”
Anyway, thanks for the clarification on the issue. Have a great holiday weekend!