Age Discrimination Articles

If You Give a Mouse a Cookie: Disparate-Impact Claims Under The ADEA And The RFOA Defense

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Wed, 02 May 2012 00:00:00 EST

On April 30, 2012, an EEOC Final Rule took effect regarding disparate-impact claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the defense of "reasonable factors other than age" (RFOA).[1] Ostensibly proposed to address issues related to the Supreme Court's decisions in Smith v. City of Jackson and Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, the Final Rule incorporates the EEOC's interpretation of the RFOA defense, despite the concerns of several commenters.

EEOC Plays New Tricks on an Old Dog - New RFOA Regulations Released

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently published new regulations setting forth its interpretation on the scope of the "reasonable factors other than age" (RFOA) defense to disparate impact claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which prohibits discrimination against employees age 40 and over. While the EEOC insists that the regulations are "not intended to impose unwarranted burdens on employers," they are likely to prevent employers from successfully asserting the RFOA defense if courts accept the EEOC's analysis. The regulations are also likely to increase the frequency with which disparate impact claims are made.

What Constitutes "Reasonable Factors Other Than Age?" The EEOC's Final Regulation Raises the Bar for Employers to Establish Defense to ADEA Claims

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, an employer may avoid liability for employment practices that have a disparate impact on individuals in the protected age group (40 and over) by showing that it acted based on "reasonable factors other than age" (commonly known as the "RFOA" defense). Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission published a final rule concerning the RFOA defense. The rule, which will take effect on April 30, is expected to make it more difficult for employers to prevail on age-based disparate impact claims.

The EEOC Misses the Mark with New Rule on the ADEA's Reasonable Factors Other Than Age Defense

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) prohibits discrimination on the basis of age and covers employees who are 40 years of age and older. The ADEA provides a statutory exception for "reasonable factors other than age."1 Since the Supreme Court held, in Smith v. City of Jackson,2 that employees could bring a disparate impact case under the ADEA, employers have been seeking guidance from the EEOC on how it would interpret the cryptic phrase "reasonable factors other than age" in the disparate impact context. In response to Smith, on March 30, 2012, the EEOC published its revised rule with regard to the RFOA defense.

EEOC Issues Final Rule on "Reasonable Factor Other Than Age" Defense to ADEA Claims

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued its final rule on the "reasonable factor other than age" defense in disparate impact cases under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).

EEOC Issues Final Rule on Reasonable Factors Other Than Age Defense in Disparate Impact Age Discrimination Cases

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has released its final rule (pdf) amending its Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) regulations to clarify the reasonable factors other than age (RFOA) defense in disparate impact cases. The changes were spurred by the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision Smith v. City of Jackson, in which the Court held that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the ADEA and that an employer could use RFOA as a defense against such a claim. Three years later in Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Lab the Court held that the employer bears the burden of production and persuasion when using a RFOA defense in an ADEA case. The final rule seeks to clarify the scope of the RFOA defense in this context.

EEOC's Final Rule on Key Age Discrimination Defense Effective April 30, 2012

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 00:00:00 EST

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued a final rule that may make more challenging a key defense available to employers facing “disparate impact” claims by employees under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

Bill Would Change Burden of Proof, Causation Standards in ADEA, ADA Cases

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:00:00 EST

On March 13, 2012, lawmakers reintroduced a bipartisan bill in the Senate that would overturn a 2009 Supreme Court decision that toughened an employee’s burden of proof in bringing a discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act (POWADA) (S. 2189) introduced by Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) would explicitly reject the June 18, 2009 Supreme Court decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., which held that a plaintiff bringing a claim under the ADEA must show by a preponderance of the evidence that age was the “but for” cause of the employer’s adverse employment decision.

EEOC Approves New Age Bias Regulation

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:00:00 EST

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently approved a draft final regulation that clarifies the Age Discrimination in Employment Act's (ADEA) "reasonable factors other than age" test. The new standard will make it easier for workers to establish disparate impact claims and will put a heavier burden on employers in defending such claims.

Workers' Explicit Emails, Not Age, Led To Discharge

webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:00:00 EST

A federal appellate court recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by a group of four workers over 50 who claimed that they were terminated in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that the workers failed to rebut their employer's legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for their termination _ sending sexually explicit emails in violation of company policy. Hodczak v. Latrobe Specialty Steel Company, No. 11-1085, Third Circuit Court of Appeals (November 17, 2011).