Private sector age-based harassment charges filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) rose almost ten percent from 2010 to 2014.
The EEOC reports the number of harassment charges filed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 increased from 3,780 charges in 2010 to 4,157 in 2014. This is an increase of 9.97 percent.
During the same four-year period, the total number of private sector harassment charges filed with the EEOC for all reasons declined by 1.96 percent. Declines were seen in complaints alleging harassment based on sex (-4.32%), national origin (-5.41%) and religion (-1.32%). Continue reading “Age-Based Harassment Complaints Rise”
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SANCTIONS CORPORATE AGE DISCRIMINATION
The appallingly blatant nature of age discrimination in America was recently exposed when more than a dozen major corporations announced a program to hire 100,000 16- to 24-year-olds by 2018.
Starbucks, Microsoft and Walmart, among others, are attempting to make an end run around the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which clearly prohibits age discrimination in hiring. They are couching their “100,000 Opportunities Initiative” as an well-intentioned effort to help young people “who face systemic barriers to jobs and education.”
Younger workers don’t have a monopoly on systemic barriers to jobs and education. The unemployment rate is high at both ends of the age spectrum, but older workers often are forced out of the workplace into an ill-advised “early retirement” by disproportionate long-term and chronic unemployment. A recent report by AARP found that half of the people in the U.S., age 45 to 70, who lost their job during the last five years are still not working. Workers forced to retire at the age of 62 incur at least a 25 percent cut in Social Security benefits; many live in poverty or near poverty for the rest of their lives.
These “leading” corporations have found a cynical way to accomplish an illegal goal. The press release states the initiative includes apprenticeships, internships, training programs, and both part-time and full-time jobs.
The ADEA states unambiguously that it is unlawful “to fail or refuse to hire” any individual “because of such individual’s age.”
Continue reading “100,000 Violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act”
Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. of Los Angeles, LLC, will pay $425,000 to settle charges that it refused to hire job applicants over the age of 40 for management trainee positions at its Burbank office between 2008 and 2011.
The company is a subsidiary of Enterprise Holdings, Inc., North America’s largest rental car company.
An investigation by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) determined that ten job applicants over the age of 40 were denied hire in favor of less qualified, younger applicants, a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The EEOC found that no applicants over 40 years of age were hired into the management trainee position at the Enterprise Burbank office during the three-year period. The EEOC also determined the office failed to adequately maintain application records pursuant to federal law. Continue reading “Enterprise Rent-A-Car Picks Up $425,000 Penalty”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has reached an innovative settlement in the case of a New York-based legal employment agency that rescinded an offer of employment to a 70-year-old attorney after learning of her date of birth.
Under the consent decree to settle the case, Strategic Legal Solutions agreed to implement a training program called the Strategic Senior Counsel Program (SSCP). The SSCP will provide free training to attorneys age 60 and over on how to conduct document review using eDiscovery software and technologies.
The firm must also pay the attorney the sum of $85,000, implement an anti-discrimination policy, provide annual training to all management and staff, post a notice regarding the case, and report annually to the EEOC for a three-year period.
The 70-year-old attorney was offered a temp position to perform document review by Strategic Legal Solutions but the offer was withdrawn when the firm learned of the candidate’s date of birth. When the attorney asked whether the withdrawal of the offer was based on her age, she was told that she would be put on the “do not use” list.
The settlement helps not only the victim but other attorneys who are denied the right to work due to widespread age discrimination by law firms and legal search firms in the U.S.
According to the EEOC, anyone interested in participating in SSCP may contact Nicole Brello, recruiting assistant with Strategic Legal Solutions, for further information at email@example.com, or call (212) 944-9112 ext. 207. SSCP training sessions will take place both at 110 East 42nd Street, New York City and in Novi, Mich., a suburb of Detroit.
Kudos to the EEOC’s New York District Office. The case is EEOC v. Strategic Legal Resources, Inc. d/b/a Strategic Legal Solutions, Civil Action No. 14-CV-07762-VEC-GWG.
A Sad Reflection on the State of Aging in the U.S.
“One of the best measures of a country is how it treats its older citizens.”
“We have to work to do more to ensure that every older American has the resources and support they need to thrive.”
There were a lot of hackneyed slogans at the seminal meeting of the once-in-a-decade White House Conference on Aging (WHCOA) – including the above observations by President Barack Obama. U.S. Labor Secretary Thomas Perez observed that “age is a state of mind.” Assistant Secretary of Aging Kathy Greenlee issued a memorable pronouncement that “a good old age is too good to lose.”
Innumerable middle-aged mostly-federal bureaucrats fawned about “this momentous day” and “this extraordinary conference” and a bevy of “experts” attempted to hawk products and services to viewers listening via the internet (i.e., Uber, Peapod Grocery Delivery, Eversave Technology, AARP brand partners,, etc.).
Greenlee was the moderator of the elder justice panel, which largely focused on the financial exploitation of older Americans. She was harshly critical of paid caregivers who financially exploited a veteran acquaintance, the perpetrator of a scam that targeted a grandparent, and a crooked financial planner who ripped off two older Americans. She never mentioned the mostly anonymous Wall Street pirates who were never prosecuted for stealing the homes and retirement savings of literally millions of older Americans during the Great Recession (2007 – ) Continue reading “Last Gasp of White House Conf. on Aging”
What a difference a decade makes – unless you are The White House Conference on Aging (WHCOA).
Then it doesn’t seem to make any difference.
Today, the once-every-decade conference will hold its signature event after months of low-level activity sponsored mainly by the AARP, America’s leading purveyor of health insurance to older Americans (not to mention vacation travel, car repairs, telephone and internet service, etc. etc.).
The WHCOA sent out emails Saturday detailing the agenda for the big event.
Apparently there was no time in the jam-packed schedule to discuss the financial havoc wrought upon older Americans by the worst recession in America in 100 years. Similarly,it does not appear the conference will address the epidemic of age discrimination in hiring that relegates older workers to chronic unemployment, low-paid work and a financially improvident “early retirement.” It’s almost as if this unpleasant chapter of American history, attributable to Wall Street pirates who were never prosecuted, never happened.
The conference will focus on care-giving, “planning for financial security at every age,” nutrition, “the power of inter-generational connections and healthy aging,” universal design and technology and the future of aging.
To add insult to injury, the organizers of the WHCOA are asking Americans to complete this sentence: “Getting older is getting better because …”
Is getting older getting better?
Continue reading “Does the White House Conf. on Aging have Alzheimer’s?”
The American Medical Association has plunged headlong into the controversy about age discrimination in the medical profession by adopting a plan to develop criteria to review “”Senior/Late Career” doctors’ physical and mental health and patient care.
At its annual meeting last month, the AMA unanimously adopted a plan to spearhead an effort to evaluate elder healthcare providers’ on-the-job effectiveness. The plan was proposed by the AMA’s Council on Medical Education.
The action comes on the heels of a dispute at Stanford University, where the Faculty Senate in May demanded repeal of a 2013 requirement that medical faculty aged 75 and older undergo enhanced health screening and peer assessment to retain their jobs.
Like Stanford University, the AMA fails to provide any research or evidence whatsoever explaining why it is necessary to screen “senior” physicians.
The AMA policy states that it will “identify organizations that should participate in the development of guidelines and methods of screening and assessment to assure that senior/late career physicians remain able to provide safe and effective care for patients.” These organizations must then “work together to develop preliminary guidelines for assessment of the senior/late career physician and develop a research agenda that could guide those interested in this field and serve as the basis for guidelines more grounded in research findings.”
Apparently, the AMA has decided there is a need for a plan and will now develop the research necessary to support that conclusion.
In the absence of any evidence that a plan is even necessary, one cannot help but speculate that ageist stereotypes against older workers have played a role in the AMA’s decision-making. These stereotypes include unsupported concerns that older workers are less competent, can’t learn new things, are rigid and quarrelsome, and refuse to accept they should step down and make room for younger doctors.. Continue reading “Wrong Diagnosis by American Medical Assn?”