## Facts

- RFE/RL, Inc., a Delaware nonprofit with its principal place of business in Munich, employed American citizens William G. Mahoney and Roy S. De Lon in Germany.
- A 1982 collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) for the Munich workplace required employees to retire at age 65.
- In 1984, Congress extended the ADEA to American citizens working abroad for American employers.
- RFE/RL sought Works Council approval to exempt American employees from the CBA’s age-65 retirement rule; under German labor rules, deviations from CBA terms were unlawful without Works Council approval.
- The Works Council refused to approve an exemption, and a Munich labor court upheld the Works Council’s decision, treating the CBA term as binding.
- RFE/RL required Mahoney and De Lon to retire at 65 pursuant to the CBA.
- Mahoney and De Lon sued under the ADEA in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; the parties agreed the retirements violated the ADEA unless the ADEA’s foreign-laws exception applied.
- The district court held the foreign-laws exception inapplicable, reasoning the employer faced only a contractual obligation, not a German “law,” and entered judgment for the employees.

## Issues

1. Whether the ADEA’s foreign-laws exception, 29 U.S.C. § 623(f)(1), applies when compliance with the ADEA would require an employer abroad to breach a CBA that foreign labor law makes legally binding and not subject to unilateral deviation.
2. Whether “violate the laws” in § 623(f)(1) includes violating foreign legal obligations that arise from and are enforced through a foreign labor-law regime (including Works Council authority and labor-court enforcement), rather than only violating foreign statutes or regulations.

## Decision

- The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court.
- The court held that § 623(f)(1) applied because German law made it unlawful for RFE/RL to disregard the mandatory-retirement provision without Works Council approval, which was denied and upheld by a German labor court.
- Because ADEA compliance would have required RFE/RL to act contrary to German law as applied to the CBA, RFE/RL was exempt from ADEA liability for enforcing retirement at age 65.

## Legal Principles

- Under 29 U.S.C. § 623(f)(1), an employer is not liable under the ADEA for conduct in a foreign workplace when compliance with the ADEA would require the employer to violate the laws of the foreign country.
- “Violate the laws” may include violating binding obligations imposed and enforced through a foreign labor-law system (including restrictions on departing from a CBA without Works Council approval), not merely contravening foreign statutes or regulations in isolation.
- When foreign labor law renders unilateral deviation from a CBA illegal and foreign institutions (such as labor courts) enforce that rule, an employer may invoke § 623(f)(1) if ADEA compliance would compel the unlawful deviation.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit held that the ADEA’s foreign-laws exception protected an American employer operating in Germany from ADEA liability where German labor law, through Works Council authority and labor-court enforcement, legally compelled adherence to a CBA mandating retirement at age 65.


Mahoney v. RFE/RL, Inc., 47 F.3d 447 (D.C. Cir. 1995)