Help Avoid Costly Age Discrimination Claims
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reports the number of age discrimination claims remains high. The EEOC logged 21,396 such cases during its 2013 fiscal year. (The record was 24,582 in the 2008 fiscal year.) What's more, the EEOC says that monetary benefits paid out for this type of claim reached a staggering total of $97.9 million in 2013. Those numbers should make employers sit up and take notice. The primary federal law in this area is the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). Under the ADEA, an employer with 20 or more employees (including government units) generally cannot discriminate based on age against individuals who are age 40 or over. It is also illegal to retaliate against an individual for opposing discriminatory employment practices based on age or for filing an age discrimination charge, testifying or participating in an investigation under the ADEA. Note that this law covers job applicants as well as employees. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing the ADEA. After an employee has filed an age discrimination complaint with the agency, the employer must file a response and provide supporting documents. Once this is done, the EEOC may conduct an investigation of the claim, which may include interviewing witnesses, taking statements under oath and subpoenaing records. Depending on the information revealed in the investigation, the EEOC may file a lawsuit against the employer. Frequently, it is in the employer's best interests to agree to a settlement. Here are summaries of what happened in seven separate cases. Case #1: The EEOC announced the settlement of its lawsuit against EZ Trip Golden State Convenience and Auto/Truck Plaza, resolving claims that the Fresno, Calif.-based company failed to hire older job applicants for its store due to age discrimination. The lawsuit alleged that a group of older job seekers in their 60s applied for jobs as cashiers at the convenience store. According to the EEOC, the older applicants were separately instructed to write their ages on the top corner of their applications. They were ultimately denied employment in favor of other candidates under the age of 35, two of whom had no prior cashier experience. The EEOC asserts that the older applicants were ultimately denied employment due to their ages in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Outcome: In January of 2011, the EEOC and the company entered into a three-year consent decree requiring broad, sweeping injunctive relief, including training, as well as a $11,500 payment to one of the claimants. Case #2: The EEOC charged that the Community College of Baltimore County failed to hire a 60-year-old as a part-time "English as a Second Language" adviser at one of its campuses. She had worked for the college as a registration clerk since 2001. Outcome: The college agreed to pay $50,000 to settle the age discrimination lawsuit. Case #3: The EEOC charged that a Charlotte, NC -area scrap metal company unlawfully refused to hire a 76-year-old man to be a diesel mechanic due to his age. The EEOC had determined that he was fully qualified and able to perform the duties of the job. Outcome: The company agreed to pay the job candidate $10,000 in monetary damages. Case #4: In its lawsuit against a subsidiary of General Electric, the EEOC alleged a 61-year-old employee was given a lower performance rating because of his age. The EEOC also claimed that the company passed him over for a promotion he deserved. Outcome: The company agreed to pay $130,000 to settle the claim. Case #5: The EEOC determined that the city of Boone, Iowa, violated the ADEA by hiring a 25-year-old rather than a more qualified 62-year-old, because of the latter's age. The city had rejected the U.S. Navy veteran for the new position of municipal infractions officer despite his extensive experience in construction, electronics, communications and management. Outcome: This case is still in the courts. Case #6: The EEOC filed a lawsuit on behalf of a 66-year-old woman who applied for a position with Perdue Farms. Although she qualified for the job, the company subsequently hired 74 substantially younger workers within the month. Outcome: The company agreed to a settlement of $25,000. Case #7: Kmart Corporation agreed in 2010 to pay $120,000 and furnish other relief to settle a lawsuit that involved discrimination against a 70-year-old pharmacist. According to the EEOC suit, a manager at one of the retailer's stores in Honolulu stated on several occasions that the pharmacist was "too old," "should just retire" and was "greedy" for continuing to work. These cases point out the severity of the situation for employers. Consult with your attorney about your situation and take precautions to avoid any potential legal problems. Steps to Take What can you do to protect your company against employee lawsuits based on age discrimination? Follow these "common sense" steps.- Provide training sessions for various jobs.
- Establish a comprehensive age discrimination policy.
- Post the policy on bulletin boards or feature in company publications.
- Emphasize skills and performance in employee reviews.
- Avoid age restrictions for promotions or training.
- Don't ask age-related questions during job interviews.
- Develop fair guidelines for evaluating job candidates.
- Do not tolerate discrimination of any kind.
| 1997 | 2003 | 2013 |
| 15,785 complaints received | 19,124 complaints received | 21,396 complaints received |
| $44.3 million in monetary benefits | $48.9 million in monetary benefits | $97.9 million in monetary benefits |