Articles Posted in age discrimination

Facebook recently vowed to rewrite its systems to ensure that employment discrimination wasn’t baked into its advertising platform, excluding workers on the basis of federally-protected classes like race, gender, age, religion and nationality. But there is evidence to suggest that whatever the company’s efforts, the type of discrimination that’s been occurring will continue.

cannabis sales attorney

T-46

A recent study published by computer science experts at the University of Southern California, Northeastern University and a non-profit think-tank called Upturn analyzed the algorithms responsible for ascertaining which users see which ads. In other words, where previous criticism of the social media giant largely focused on its targeting (the audience ad buyers sought to reach), these researchers looked at the algorithms responsible for advertisement delivery (who those ads were ultimately going to reach).

The technology sector has been noted for its extensive examples of alleged California age discrimination complaints, particularly in Silicon Valley, home to some the tech industry’s high rollers. IBM is a firm that has repeatedly been accused of unlawfully discriminating against employees on the basis of age. age discrimination lawyer

Four former employees of the company allege top executives at the firm were calculated in violating the law during a round of layoffs that specifically targeted older workers. It sounds outrageous, but as our Los Angeles age discrimination attorneys know, these are just four of an estimated 20,000 workers over the age of 40 who have been discharged the last six years.

The workers say the company violated federal laws like the Age Discrimination in Employment and the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA) in trying to alter the makeup of the company’s senior administration roles by replacing the majority of baby boomers at the helm with younger workers and recent college graduates perceived as more tech-savvy. Continue reading

It is illegal – in California and across the U.S., per the EEOC –  to discriminate against a job applicant based on their race, color, religion, gender (including gender identity, sexual orientation and pregnancy) national origin, age (over 40), disability or genetic information. Yet one of the most frequently-used forums to lure new hires has essentially been facilitating just that, according to critics and a few employment lawsuits filed by the National Fair Housing Alliance, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Communication Workers of America. Los Angeles employment discrimination attorney

Social media giant Facebook has faced years of criticism that it allowed companies advertising job listings to use key categories allowing employers to cherry-pick who their ads would be shown to based on age group, gender and race. The New York Times now reports Facebook has agreed it will stop doing this.

It’s not just prospective employees that have been complaining either. Those advertising credit and housing have also been allowed to screen their ads so that they would only show to a certain subset of social media users. (Housing and credit are also regulated by federal anti-discrimination laws that bar selection of applicants on such bases.) Continue reading

In order to be successful in claiming employment discrimination in California, employees must first assert they are part of a protected class that received unfair treatment. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) explains that to discriminate means to treat someone less favorably and disparately, with federal protections extending to individuals on the basis of gender, religion, color, race, national origin, disability or age (over 40). In California, unlawful practices spelled out by the Fair Employment and Housing Act 12940 outlines protections for these classes, but also for:

  • Genetic information
  • Marital status
  • Gender identity/gender expression
  • Sexual orientation
  • Military or veteran statusemployment discrimination attorney Los Angeles

Part of the reason California’s additional protected classes matter is they go farther than federal law, giving unfairly-treated employees more options to pursue action.

As Los Angeles employment discrimination attorneys can explain, “protected classes” aren’t merely limited to minorities. But employment discrimination is often subtle – and doesn’t necessarily need to actually be a part of a protected class in order to be protected. Discrimination based on the perception of belonging or association with others in these classes can be actionable in California employment discrimination cases too.

Perceived Protected Class Employment Discrimination Continue reading

Employment discrimination can be subtle, but it is described as unequal treatment or attitudes toward one group of employees or against another resulting in unfair, adverse impacts to a protected class of employees or prospective employees. Among the most common questions our Riverside employment discrimination attorneys receive is, “How do I file an employment discrimination lawsuit in California?” One of the first things we need to determine is whether you belong to a protected class, and if so, whether they suffered disparate and negative treatment as at least partially a result of being in that class. Riverside Employment Discrimination Lawyer

The California Fair Employment Practices Act marks its 60th anniversary in 2019. The law prohibits discrimination against employees and/or applicants on the basis of one’s actual or perceived belonging or association with one of the following protected classes:

Gender (this provision also bars sexual harassment);

  • Race and Color
  • Ethnicity
  • Marital Status
  • National Origin or Ancestry
  • Religious Creed
  • Pregnancy, Childbirth or Related Conditions (including lactation)
  • Disability
  • Age (pertains to individuals over the age of 40)

Once our Riverside employment discrimination attorneys examine the facts of the case to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to file a claim, we’ll give you a detailed rundown of your legal options. Unlike other types of civil claims, the process of filing an employment discrimination claim doesn’t always go straight to court. Continue reading

Age discrimination permeates workplaces across California within all industries and income brackets, with one study revealing reports of on-the-job ageism rising 44 percent in the last two decades. Riverside age discrimination attorneys know it’s only likely to get worse as the population ages. People are working well into their 70s and even 80s, unlike generations past, which means there is greater competition for jobs. By 2022, Generation Z will be hitting the workforce, setting the stage for even fiercer competition.age discrimination lawyer

In yet another recent California age discrimination claim, 18 plaintiffs allege they were targeted for their age, wrongly accused of “not meeting goals,” forced to give up client bases (which were then handed to younger insurance agents) and then either wrongfully terminated or forced to resign. One insurance agent was reportedly told he could work until he retired, but that he’d be forced to give up his client base – after 35 years of service as an agent for the same company. Plaintiffs are also alleging they were wrongfully characterized as independent contractors, despite the fact that the company controlled nearly every aspect of their daily work (a significant factor in the determination of whether someone is or is not an independent contractor).

The federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) offers protection for workers over the age of 40 from workplace discrimination based on age. Despite this, officials with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission referred to the problem of age discrimination as an “open secret,” and has vowed to target the issue aggressively this year and perhaps beyond.  Continue reading

Allegations of California age discrimination at tech companies are continuing to pile up. One of those on the receiving end of this litigation is IBM, which has noted in a March 2018 ProPublica investigation, had eliminated more than 200,000 of its employees over the age of 40 – roughly 60 percent of its estimated total U.S. job cuts – just in the five years preceding. Los Angeles age discrimination attorneys at Nassiri Law Group noted recently that same investigation was cited in a Jan. 17, 2019 employer retaliation affidavit filed by a former executive as evidence in a pending class action lawsuit. The executive alleging she was ordered by her employer not to comply with the request of a federal agency to turn over the names of employees over 50 who had been laid off by the company.Los Angeles age discrimination lawyer

Further, the then-vice president and senior executive at the company’s Nevada branch, she warned superiors that the company was vulnerable to age discrimination claims because of its layoff practices. She now alleges she was fired in 2017 as a result of giving these warnings. A company spokeswoman denied this in a statement issued to a ProPublica reporter following up, saying the executive’s termination was entirely unrelated to age discrimination allegations, and that the 39-year veteran of the company, age 62, was terminated for “gross misconduct.” The former employee indicated in court records that she’d received decades of excellent reviews and insisted the misconduct charge was unfounded.

As noted in the 2018 story, the company reportedly (as indicated in at least one internal company record) intended to attain the “correct seniority mix.” Former employees – including this one – allege these practices flouted federal and California age discrimination laws. Continue reading

A recent analysis conducted by ProPublica and the Urban Institute reveals workers over 50 in the U.S. are more likely to be pushed out of their longtime jobs and careers, sometimes long before they choose to retire. In many cases, this results in an irreversible degree of financial damage. Orange County age discrimination attorneys in California know that many Americans assume that by the time they reach 50-years-old, they’ll have the benefit of steady work, they’ll have a solid start on their retirement savings and at least 15 to 17 more years of their career ahead of them – with some freedom to decide exactly when they’ll go. Unfortunately, that is no longer the reality for many workers.age discrimination attorney

Researchers conducted this analysis by examining information gleaned from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), which is one of the best broad-based information sources we have about aging in the U.S., tracking a nationally representative sample of about 20,000 people since 1992, starting when they turned 50 and on through the rest of their lives.

What they discovered was that by the time workers entered the study to the time they they exited a paid employment role, approximately 56 percent were laid off at least one time (some more) or left jobs under circumstances that so financially destructive it was almost certain they were pushed out rather than chose to exit voluntarily. After such an event, only one-tenth of those workers went on to ever earn as much as they did before their employment setbacks. Even years later, household incomes of older workers who experience such losses are still much lower than those who don’t work. It’s not how most people anticipate ending their careers. Continue reading

U.S. and California law provide very specific discrimination protections for employees who have historically been the greatest targets. Typically, these are women, racial minorities, older workers and those with disabilities. We’ve come a long way in the last 50- to- 60-years in ensuring California workers aren’t fired, demoted, transferred or miss out on key benefits because of prejudice by their employers. However, a key component of those protections is the worker’s classification. Those who are classified as “employees” are entitled to a host of employment law protections – everything from minimum wages and regular mandated breaks to reasonable accommodations if one one’s pregnancy requires restrictions. Los Angeles employment attorneys often have to explain another important protection denied independent contractors: Anti-discrimination laws. workplace discrimination Los Angeles

Approximately 1 in 7 jobs in America is classified as independent contractor or some other contingent-employment arrangement. This amounts to millions of Americans – roughly 14 percent in all, according the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – whose work as freelancers, consultants, temporary agency laborers and contractors who are denied protections against discrimination for their age, race, gender, religion and disability. So for instance, while most employees can expect to be protected from age discrimination from their employer when they reach the age of 40, a freelancer has no such guarantee.

There are some analyses that suggest the unprotected workforce could be even larger. For instance, the California-based Staffing Industry Analysts recently released information indicating roughly 30 percent of American workers could be counted in the “contingent workforce.” The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission makes it clear that anti-discrimination statutes exempt independent contractors as well as those working for employment agencies. Sometimes, anti-discrimination protections depend on the number of employees a company has.  Continue reading

There is an unfortunate stereotype perpetuated in the technology sector that older workers can’t be effective with newer tech. That the younger employees the fresher the ideas and the greater opportunities for the firm to thrive.employer attorney Riverside California

Such sentiments have been revealed time and again in California age discrimination lawsuits against tech companies in Silicon Valley.

The latest class action age discrimination lawsuit is against technology firm IBM, filed on behalf of three former employees in North Carolina and Georgia, filed in a federal court in New York. Plaintiffs – all between the ages of 55 and 67 – allege the company systematically discriminated against older workers by laying them off disproportionate to the younger employees and also by declining to hire them for other positions that were open in the company. One of the workers had been employed at the firm for 15 years, while the other two had worked for the company more than three decades. Continue reading