David is a police officer with the New York Police Department (NYPD).NYPD asks David to retire when he turns 65.It also informs
David that he is eligible for an annual pension of $40,000.David feels that he is a good police officer and that he has been unfairly discriminated against because of his age.He files a complaint under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act against the NYPD.Which of the following statements is true in this case? A) David will most likely win the case as it is illegal to subject an employee who receives less than $44,000 a year to mandatory retirement.
B) David will most likely lose the case as it is legal for police officers to be subjected to mandatory retirement.
C) David will most likely lose the case as he is not a high-level employee.
D) David will most likely win the case as he is not yet 70, and it is only legal to subject employees who are 70 and older to mandatory retirement.
B) David will most likely lose the case as it is legal for police officers to be subjected to mandatory retirement.
Explanation:
According to relevant laws, an officer must retire upon attaining the age of 62 of after 20 years of uniformed service (if it is an Early Retirement) or 22 years of uniformed service (if it is a Normal Retirement).
Regardless of whether it is a Normal or Early retirement, the officer must disengage at the age of 62.
The relevant laws which govern the administration of the NYPD retirement process as wells pensions are:
the Administrative Code of the City of New York (NYCAC);
the New York State Retirement and Social Security Law (RSSL), and
the Rules of New York City Police Pension Fund (NYCPPF)
The correct answer is true as the independent projects are selected based on the net present worth and the rate of return and do nothing alternative. In the independent projects, there is no need for the incremental B/C analysis. Simple B/C ratio will do it. If the B/C > 1, benefits outweigh the costs and the project is selected provided that there is no budget limitation. Thus, the given statement is absolutely the true one.
Preference is given to people that live with the dependent so this puts William at the least priority because he doesn't live with Autumn thereby leaving Charlotte and her mother.
Preference is then given to the biological parents of the dependent which means that Diana is has second priority. Charlotte is therefore the the most preferred to claim her daughter as a dependent which would allow her greater tax deductions.
