context: However, the Fifth Circuit has held that the remedies provisions of the FLSA and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") must be interpreted consistently.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 455 F.3d 489, 499
citation_a.parenthetical: "Because the remedies available under the ADEA and the FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act] both track the FLSA, cases interpreting remedies under the statutes should be consistent."
citation_a.sentence: See Lubke v. City of Arlington, 455 F.3d 489, 499 (5th Cir.2006) (“Because the remedies available under the ADEA and the FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act] both track the FLSA, cases interpreting remedies under the statutes should be consistent.”); see also Johnson v. Martin, 473 F.3d 220, 222 (5th Cir.2006) (applying ADEA precedent to the FLSA to determine whether wages earned after termination offset lost wage damages because “[t]he FLSA and ADEA have the same remedies provisions”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 473 F.3d 220, 222
citation_b.parenthetical: applying ADEA precedent to the FLSA to determine whether wages earned after termination offset lost wage damages because "[t]he FLSA and ADEA have the same remedies provisions"
citation_b.sentence: See Lubke v. City of Arlington, 455 F.3d 489, 499 (5th Cir.2006) (“Because the remedies available under the ADEA and the FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act] both track the FLSA, cases interpreting remedies under the statutes should be consistent.”); see also Johnson v. Martin, 473 F.3d 220, 222 (5th Cir.2006) (applying ADEA precedent to the FLSA to determine whether wages earned after termination offset lost wage damages because “[t]he FLSA and ADEA have the same remedies provisions”).