Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Is age-based everse discrimination acceptable in the workplace?

0
Posted

Is age-based
everse discrimination acceptable in the workplace?

0

A Supreme Court case involving age bias in employment decisions points to the need for more psychological research on related questions. BY THOMAS L. HAFEMEISTER, JD, PHD Institute of Law, Psychiatry & Public Policy University of Virginia School of Law and School of Medicine Print version: page 66 The 1967 federal Age Discrimina-tion in Employment Act (ADEA) protects employees 40 years old and older from age bias in employment decisions. In a typical ADEA claim, employees older than 40 years assert that workers younger than 40 have received preferential treatment based on age rather than merit. In a twist on this scenario, however, the U.S. Supreme Court in Cline v. General Dynamics Land Systems Inc. (No. 02-1080) (71[40] U.S.L.W. 3659), will review a ruling by the Sixth Circuit that claims of “reverse discrimination” can also be pursued under the ADEA. In this case, a group of employees between 40 and 49 years old claimed that they had been discriminated against by a collective bargai

0

The 1967 federal Age Discrimina-tion in Employment Act (ADEA) protects employees 40 years old and older from age bias in employment decisions. In a typical ADEA claim, employees older than 40 years assert that workers younger than 40 have received preferential treatment based on age rather than merit. In a twist on this scenario, however, the U.S. Supreme Court in Cline v. General Dynamics Land Systems Inc. (No. 02-1080) (71[40] U.S.L.W. 3659), will review a ruling by the Sixth Circuit that claims of “reverse discrimination” can also be pursued under the ADEA. In this case, a group of employees between 40 and 49 years old claimed that they had been discriminated against by a collective bargaining agreement that provided retirement benefits only to those employees older than 50. A lower court, in accord with prior rulings of the First and Seventh Circuits, held that the ADEA was intended only to prohibit employment decisions that favored younger over older employees and does not apply t

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123