Age Discrimination hits your bottom line

by on December 15, 2008 · 0 Comment POSTED IN: HR Info Center

Age was the issue

When you lay off workers in a Reduction in Force, you’d better be certain that the jobs are actually eliminated – especially if the people in those jobs are in a protected class of workers.

When a couple of New Jersey bank branch managers were laid off, it looked to them as though their jobs were simply recycled, renamed and reassigned – to two younger workers.

The jury saw it that way too. And the employees won a $1.8 million punitive award in an age discrimination lawsuit.

Cite: Baker v. National State Bank, New Jersey Superior Court, 2002.

Young guys’ favored

An ill-advised supervisor told a 66-year-old employee he had to take a pay cut so the company could give the “younger guys” more money.

The “younger guys” – 37 and 21 respectively – got their raises. The older worker was fired, by the Gary, IN-based firm, when he refused to work for less. Unsurprisingly, when he sued for age discrimination, the court said his case could go to trial.

Remember: The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects over-40 workers against discriminatory pay, hiring and working conditions.

Cite: Cheek v. Lazzaro Cos

40+ need not apply

A video store chain’s management thought it seemed like a good idea to hire young employees who could give their outlets a younger, cooler look and feel.

That was a big mistake.

One female applicant in her 40s got the impression that she was denied a job at a Family Video store for no reason other than her age.

Passed over older applicants

The angry applicant complained to the EEOC, which launched an inquiry. The inquiry was a disaster for the chain: it was evident right away that the stores were staffed almost exclusively with young people, that applicants over age 40 were routinely passed over, and – most damaging to the company – in case after case, there was no reason other than age to refuse to hire a 40+ applicant.

After the inquiry, the EEOC initiated an ADEA lawsuit against the chain, alleging age discrimination in its hiring practices.

In a settlement, the video chain agreed to pay the woman $117,000, change its hiring policies and notify applicants who had been denied employment because of their age when jobs became available.

Cite: EEOC v. Family Video Movie Club, Inc.

Leave a Reply


Request a Free Demo

We'd love to show you how this industry-leading training system can help you develop your team. Please fill out this quick form or give us a call at 877-792-2172 to schedule your one-on-one demo with a Rapid Learning Specialist.