In January, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments about whether the age discrimination rules for the federal workforce are different from those for private sector employees.
Three referees who have worked with the NCAA for over a decade filed suit recently for age discrimination. They claim that, despite highly favorable evaluations, the number of games they have been assigned to officiate has dropped off. In fact, none has been assigned to the most lucrative games, those in Division I.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibits age discrimination against employees who are 40 and over. It applies to both the private and public sectors, including the federal government. However, the language in the Act is slightly different when talking about federal employees than when discussing private sector employees.
According to a recent survey by the insurer Hiscox USA, 21% of American workers over 40 say they have suffered from age discrimination in the workplace. The age at which they are most likely to experience discrimination is 51, and men may suffer it slightly more than women.
Earlier this year, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not prohibit discrimination against older job seekers -- only existing employees. Although the Seventh Circuit only covers Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana, the ruling is final in those states unless the U.S. Supreme Court overturns it. Now, the AARP Foundation has asked the high court for a hearing on the matter.
Ever since the nonprofit newsroom ProPublica did an exposé last year, former IBM employees have wondered whether the company's recent global restructuring and layoffs were motivated in part by age discrimination. Now, a group of ex-workers has filed a federal lawsuit in an effort to break down two barriers IBM put in the way of age discrimination claims.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) was passed in 1967. A Labor Department report leading to its passage noted that, at the time, half of all job ads in the private sector explicitly barred applications from people 55 or over. A quarter excluded anyone over 45.
Can employers legally limit the ages of job prospects by recruiting only on college campuses? Can they cap the years of experience applicants are allowed to have? Can they set up social media recruitment campaigns that exclude older people? Or would taking active steps to minimize a job's visibility to workers over 40 violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)?
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibits discrimination against workers 40 and over. While the law prohibits discrimination in any aspect of employment, including hiring, it is unclear whether the ADEA prohibits a certain type of discrimination called "disparate impact" discrimination in hiring. One federal court ruled that it does not. Now, a second federal court has ruled the opposite.
Recently, the independent, nonprofit investigative journalism newsroom ProPublica released a detailed analysis of massive personnel changes at IBM that it believes indicate age discrimination.