Judges: STEVEN K. SNYDER
Filed Date: 5/26/1994
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/6/2016
ATTORNEY GENERAL LOVING HAS ASKED ME TO RESPOND TO YOUR OPINION REQUEST IN WHICH YOU ASKED, IN EFFECT, THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:
IS IT A VIOLATION OF THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT FOR A RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ("COOPERATIVE") ORGANIZED PURSUANT TO 18 Ohio St. 437 (1991), ET SEQ,. TO HAVE A BYLAW PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE COOPERATIVE FROM SERVING AFTER THE AGE OF SEVENTY YEARS?
BECAUSE YOUR QUESTION MAY BE ANSWERED BY REFERENCE TO THE CONTROLLING STATUTES AND CASE LAW AND IN CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC FACTS, THE ISSUANCE OF A FORMAL OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS NOT NECESSARY. THE DISCUSSION WHICH FOLLOWS IS, THEREFORE, NOT AN OFFICIAL OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BUT RATHER REPRESENTS THE ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE UNDERSIGNED ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL.
IN ORDER TO RESPOND TO YOUR QUERY, IT IS NECESSARY TO REVIEW BOTH THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT ("ADEA"),
WHETHER A RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE IS AN EMPLOYER UNDER THIS PROVISION IS A QUESTION OF FACT WHICH THIS OPINION DOES NOT ADDRESS. THE TERM "EMPLOYER" ALSO MEANS (2) A STATE OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF A STATE AND ANY AGENCY OR INSTRUMENTALITY OF A STATE OR A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF A STATE(.)" A.G. OPIN. NO. 89-072 CONCLUDED THAT A COOPERATIVE IS NOT A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY BUT A PRIVATE CORPORATION. THEREFORE, A RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE IS NOT AN "EMPLOYER" UNDER
BECAUSE THE ADEA PROHIBITS AGE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL WITH RESPECT TO TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT, WE MUST DETERMINE WHETHER THE TRUSTEES OF A COOPERATIVE SERVE IN AN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP. THE ADEA DEFINES EMPLOYEE AS "AN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYED BY AN EMPLOYER."
A CASE SIMILAR TO THE SITUATION POSED IS SCHOENBAUM V. ORANGE COUNTY CENTER FOR PERFORMING ARTS. INC., 677 F.SUPP. 1036 (C.D.CA.1987), WHEREIN A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT FOUND THAT THE DIRECTOR/TRUSTEES OF A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER WERE NOT CONSIDERED EMPLOYEES UNDER THE ADEA. THE COURT WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DIRECTOR/TRUSTEES WERE MORE SIMILAR TO THOSE OF A CORPORATE BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAN TRADITIONAL FUNCTIONS OF AN EMPLOYEE. THE TRUSTEES LACKED THE TRADITIONAL EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP.
THIS SAME RATIONALE CAN BE APPLIED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF COOPERATIVES FORMED UNDER 18 Ohio St. 437, ET SEQ. THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ARE TO MANAGE THE BUSINESS AND AFFAIRS OF THE RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE MUCH LIKE THAT OF A TRADITIONAL CORPORATE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THEY ARE NOT SERVING THE COOPERATIVE IN AN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP.
THEREFORE, IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE ADEA DOES NOT ENCOMPASS, AS EMPLOYEES, MEMBERS OF A BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF A RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE FORMED UNDER THE STATUTES OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, AND A BYLAW PROVISION PROHIBITING ONE FROM SERVING ON SAID BOARD OF TRUSTEES AFTER OBTAINING THE AGE OF SEVENTY YEARS IS NOT A VIOLATION OF THAT ACT.
(CIVIL RIGHTS)
(STEVEN K. SNYDER)