Articles Tagged with age discrimination

Age discrimination is an ongoing problem in workplaces throughout California and the U.S. Recognizing this, the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a bill aimed at protecting older Americans, potentially making it easier to file suit for violations. age discrimination

The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act was introduced earlier this year as part of a bipartisan effort. The goal is to restore workplace protections for 40-and-older workers that were undercut in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. That ruling made it tougher to prove age discrimination.

In that case, the high court held that plaintiffs alleging disparate treatment under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 must prove that one’s older age was the “but-for” cause of the adverse employment action. In other words, as our Los Angeles age discrimination lawyers can explain, the burden doesn’t shift to the employer to prove the action would have been taken regardless of age – even if the worker produces evidence that age was one motivating factor. The court held that ADEA doesn’t authorize a so-called “mixed-motives age discrimination claim.” Rather, it states that claims may be brought when an employer took some adverse action “because of age” and that age was the “reason” the employer decided to act. Continue Reading ›

The City of Huntington Beach has paid $2.5 million total to settle claims of disability and age discrimination allegedly perpetrated in part by the city attorney. The payout comes after the city paid $1.5 million fighting the claims. Los Angeles age discrimination lawyer

According to The Orange County Register, two former employees allege the city’s former and current senior deputy city attorneys made numerous efforts to force them and other older workers out of their employment roles.

The case had been pending for two years, and council members, who had to approve the legal fees, insist the case has always been without merit, which is why they pushed the outside lawyers to prepare for trial rather than try to settle. Ultimately, though, they chose to settle with one claimant for $1 million and another for $1.5 million. Continue Reading ›

Millennials are often derided in popular culture as being overly consumed by the digital age and largely defined as the entitled youth. But as of January 1, 2021, the oldest among them (born in 1981) turned 40. As our Los Angeles age discrimination lawyers can explain, that’s old enough to file claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment ACT (ADEA) of 1967.age discrimination

Just like every other generation before them, millennials aren’t forever young. In fact, age discrimination is already facing some millennials – women in particular. We may see this become a pivotal battleground as the nation recovers from the economic crisis of coronavirus, given that discrimination is often worse during and immediately after periods of recession.

Of course, most people who are just turning 40-years-old aren’t going to bear the brunt of age discrimination in the workforce. Still, those who will tend to see it first are women. Continue Reading ›

Is saying, “Ok, boomer” a form of age discrimination? The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing the possibility. While we await a decision, companies may want to be wary of workers tossing the phrase around. age discrimination lawyer Los Angeles

The pithy catchphrase went viral last year as a means of taking a dig at older generations – specifically the perception that aging individuals tend to be more judgmental, narrow-minded and rigidly conservative. Recently, while considering an age discrimination lawsuit, Chief Justice John Roberts, himself a baby boomer (those born between 1946 and 1964), asked hypothetically whether use of the phrase said during the hiring process would constitute age discrimination.

The case in question involves an older government employee who alleges she was discriminated against because of her age. When Roberts asked the question, the somber mood within the courtroom lightened as many chuckled. However, the plaintiff’s employment attorney did seize on it to make a serious point, noting that the use of ethnic slurs in the hiring process could easily be construed as evidence of age discrimination – why not a quip like, “Ok, boomer”? Continue Reading ›

Hiring is an integral but time-consuming, expensive and often tedious process with which every company must contend. In looking for ways to cut down on exhausting searches, an increasing number of companies are turning to artificial intelligence (AI) systems to help more quickly identify qualified candidates. This can prove especially beneficial for firms that need to cut through a huge influx of potential applications. age discrimination attorney

However, there is growing concern that such AI application systems may be perpetuating some forms of discrimination, particularly age, gender and race. This is in spite of tech companies insisting that their systems are designed to root out long-existing human biases.

Last year, Amazon tested integrated machine-learning techniques on its recruiting platform. This was supposed to be a “smart tool” that could help managers pick ideal job candidates faster. However, after being fed a decade’s worth of resumes, the system began showing a clear bias toward male candidates. In troubleshooting, engineers with the company figured out that because most of the resumes were coming from male candidates, it made the “artificial intelligence” leap that male candidates were more desirable, and thus downgraded the ratings of female applicants. Engineers addressed this by editing the programs so that they included more gender neutral terms. However, that doesn’t mean these systems won’t still prove discriminatory – now and in the future. (Amazon decided to ax the project before fully launching it, perhaps realizing the potential legal liability landmine.)

It’s no leap to surmise similar discriminatory patterns could soon emerge.

If, for instance, a firm has a general tendency to hire fresh-out-of-college candidates, these systems could easily begin trending toward a younger workforce bias. Continue Reading ›

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges banks, insurance companies, investment firms and loan officers were able to discriminate against older, female prospective new hires and customers using Facebook Inc.’s targeted ad platforms. The complaint, filed in San Francisco federal court, insists the company allowed financial service and other advertisers target their ads to certain consumers on the basis of age and gender – even though the company has already been taken to task for similar discriminatory ad practices.employment discrimination

If it’s proven that this violated civil rights and employment rights laws, Facebook could be vulnerable to paying billions in damages to users across the country.

An attorney for the plaintiffs told Reuters the relative novelty of the internet doesn’t usurp the civil rights and employment law protections that Americans enjoy. A spokeswoman for Facebook said the company is taking the time to review the complaint, and expressed pride with the gains the social media giant has made on this front over the last few years. Continue Reading ›

The hostility – contrived or otherwise – between Millennials & Generation Z v. Baby Boomers has become pervasive in media, public forums and online – recently giving birth to the viral phrase, “Ok, Boomer!” It’s been used by younger generations in response to interrupted city hall presentations on climate change, Donald Trump tweets, cringe-worthy YouTube videos or really any remark of condescension toward those under 30 or issues of great importance to them. The phrase is on memes, t-shirts and a growing inventory of merchandise, and The New York Times announced it “marks the end of friendly generational relations.”

Just keep it out of the office. age discrimination

As our Los Angeles age discrimination lawyers can explain, “Ok, Boomer!” may seem at worst a rudely dismissive declarative statement on generational differences, but if it worms its way into workplace vernacular, it’s likely to be presented as evidence at some point in an employment lawsuit. That’s because age (over 40) is a protected category in the workplace. There are numerous state and federal laws that shield older workers from discriminatory, adverse employment action on that basis. However, it’s notoriously challenging to prove. A phrase like this tossed around more than once, particularly among more than one staffer or supervisor, the case for age discrimination can get much easier.

Referred to as the “digital equivalent of an eye roll,” it might seem harmless with strangers online or even across the Thanksgiving dinner table, but it can pretty quickly cease to be a joke and start being a real problem in the workplace. And it’s not that even employment attorneys can’t take a joke, but the fact is it’s been more than 50 years since the passage of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 and still 6 in 10 older workers say they have experienced age discrimination at work. Continue Reading ›

Although age discrimination is known to be extremely prevalent in California and throughout the country, it’s one of the harder cases to prove in employment litigation. It is one of the only protected classes listed under federal Title VII discrimination that doesn’t require the official EEOC sign-of to sue. (Claims can also be filed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.)age discrimination
What really through a kink in the wrench of workers in these have to show that age was the employer’s prime motivation behind adverse employment action (hiring, firing, demotion, discipline, transfer, denial of benefits/perks, etc.). Because employer knew they only needed to come up with one other plausible, non-discriminatory reason for the action, the plaintiff would have difficulty making a case.
Now, a U.S. Senate Bill with bipartisan support would reverse that ruling, Gross v. FBL Financial Services, and make it so that workers wouldn’t have to prove discrimination based on age was the prevailing reason employer took the adverse action they did. Instead, they could prove discrimination based on age was one factor in the decision to fire, discipline, transfer, demote or not hire in the first place.

Continue Reading ›

Older workers are the fastest-growing group of Americans – and also some of the most vulnerable to adverse action on the basis of their age, which is a protected status under state and federal civil rights law. As age discrimination lawyers can explain, the law protects workers from age-based bias starting at age 40, but those over 65 are the most at-risk.grayhair

These individuals in decades past did not continue their careers much beyond this time, if at all, but that’s been changing. Reasons for this include:

  • Wage growth stagnation
  • Disappearing pensions
  • Delaying claims to Social Security benefits to maximize payouts
  • Longer lifespans
  • Not having much of a retirement to speak of or fearing it will run out way too soon

A survey conducted last year by Gallop found that more than 40 percent expect to work beyond age 65. That’s a sizable uptick since 2004, when 26 percent answered the same, and almost quadruple what it was in 1995. It’s likely to continue this upward trajectory. Continue Reading ›

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 ›

Contact Information