A great many of our cases involve discrimination and retaliation. We are heavily involved in cases of discrimination based on race, disability, gender, national origin, and ethnicity.
Employment Age Discrimination
With an increase in the number of individuals living longer, there is a rise in the median age of the American workforce. Indeed, older workers, who are generally classified as those age 55 or older, are now often choosing to delay their retirement. However, these mature workers may experience age discrimination. This is due for the most part on stereotypes that older workers lack the requisite knowledge, skills, energy, or attitude to perform their jobs.
Fortunately, older workers are protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.S. §621 et seq. (“ADEA”) and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. §10:5-1 et seq. (“NJLAD”). The ADEA prohibits discrimination in employment against workers age 40 or older[1], where the employer regularly employs 20 or more employees. Unlike the ADEA, the NJLAD protects employees from age 18 to 70[2] and applies to all employers regardless of the number of workers they employ[3].
Both of these laws apply to both employees and job applicants, and make it unlawful to refuse to hire, to discharge, or to otherwise discriminate against an individual in compensation or in the terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of the individual’s age. In addition, both laws prohibit the publication of classified job advertisements that include age-based preferences or specifications, unless age is shown to be a bona fide occupational qualification (“BFOQ”).
Further, the courts have developed two theories of liability under the ADEA and the NJLAD: disparate treatment and disparate impact. The disparate treatment theory is where an employer treats some individuals less favorably than others, in the terms and conditions of employment, such as promotion, raises, or training, because of their age. In other words, a plaintiff would have to prove that an employer acted with a discriminatory motive. Certain inappropriate age-related comments by an employer when coupled with an adverse employment action may be evidence of discriminatory motive. Conversely, a plaintiff claiming disparate impact discrimination need not prove an employer’s discriminatory motive, but must show that a facially neutral employment policy disproportionately adversely affects the members of a protected class, which in this case would be based on age. An example of this would be a mandatory retirement policy based on age. However, there are statutory exceptions to certain age-based employment policies. Therefore, claims of age discrimination must be decided on a case-by-case basis.
In sum, age discrimination, as with other forms of discrimination, remains prevalent in the workplace. However, through the enforcement of the ADEA and the NJLAD, we hope to help eradicate employment discrimination against older workers, and assist victims of age discrimination in receiving proper redress.
Do you believe you have been discriminated against in employment due to your age? It’s important to act quickly to find out if you may have a claim of age discrimination in employment. Since every situation is different, an experienced New Jersey employment attorney can help you fully understand your rights in this area.
The attorneys at Hyderally & Associates are ready to help you. They have experience working to fight age discrimination in employment, so they can review your situation to provide information that will help you decide if you would like to pursue a claim against an employer under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination or federal law. Call an experienced employment attorney in New Jersey at (973) 509-8500.
This article is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and may not reasonably be relied upon as such. If you face a legal issue, you should consult a qualified attorney for independent legal advice with regard to your particular set of facts. This article may constitute attorney advertising. This article is not intended to communicate with anyone in a state or other jurisdiction where such an article may fail to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state or jurisdiction.
- [1] 29 U.S.C. §631(a).