Archive for the 'Discrimination' Category

Understanding the ins and outs of age discrimination in employment doesn’t necessarily take a legal degree, but it does take a whole lot of common sense. The law enacted in the 1960s is designed to protect employees age 40 and over from age discrimination in employment, it is not designed to penalize employers from getting the business they need done completed.

To help employees and employers understand some of the basics about age discrimination in employment it is important to understand some of the most common questions that come up in regard to the law and their answers.

What is age discrimination?
Simply put, age discrimination in employment involves any unfair act or practice that discriminates against a person based on their age. It is unlawful to base a hiring, firing or promotional decision based on age.

Is anyone exempt from the law?
Yes. The age discrimination in employment laws apply to companies and employers that have 20 or more employees on staff. It is still generally considered quite wise for small employers to ensure the law is adhered to, as well. The law applies to employment agencies, labor organizations and government bodies, as well.

Is there ever a cause for an exception to the rule?
In some employment situations the age discrimination in employment laws will not apply based on the nature of the work. The onus to prove age needs to be a factor in decision making falls on the employer.

What should an employee do when discrimination is suspected?
Complaints can be filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Violations can take place prior to hiring, during the advertising process and in regard to promotions, firings, layoffs and even benefits.

How do benefits relate to age discrimination in employment laws?
A law passed in 1990 makes it illegal for employers to deny benefits to older employees. A reduced package may be offered if the cost to the employer is the same as that for younger employees.

Does the law apply to apprenticeship programs?
Yes. Unless a program has otherwise been exempted from the laws, apprenticeship programs are subject to its reach.

Is it legal for a potential employer to ask a candidate’s age?
The practice is not prohibited under law, but it can open the door for scrutiny if a complaint is filed. Generally, employers choose not to ask date of birth or age prior to the actual hiring process.

Understanding the age discrimination in employment laws can help employees recognize problems. It can also protect employers. Before hiring or going out for a job, it is not a bad idea to consider brushing up on the laws that govern employment.

Plaintiff Pro Se Won Verdict Employment Discrimination Cases

Employment discrimination is a serious charge that often results in cases going to court. When employees choose to represent themselves with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and in court, the action is called a pro se case. This translates from Latin into English as self representation. While there are examples of plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination cases, many employees choose to hire representation for a number of reasons.

Although some examples of plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination cases exist, the benefits of hiring legal representation are often seen as too high for many to try this. This is especially deemed so if an employee chooses to seek damages in court. Under law, employees can seek back pay and other damages, for example, for wrongful termination and other similar charges.

Despite plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination cases that serve as examples of the ability for individuals to win on their own, the upside of hiring an attorney often includes:

• The backing of knowledge. An attorney who is skilled in handling discrimination cases often has better skills at hand to undertake the right legal maneuvering. An experience lawyer knows what papers to file, what constitutes reasonable proof and how to subpoena and interview potential witnesses in a case. While plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination cases are on the record, sometimes knowledge of the system is very much required to prove a tricky case.
• Peace of mind. An employee who has gone through a wrongful termination or otherwise suffered discrimination, generally feels they’ve been through enough. Despite plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination examples, many employees choose to hire representation to take the burden off their own shoulders.
• Better chance of winning. Determining the win/loss record of represented versus non-represented cases is difficult, but many employees just find they feel more comfort in their chances of winning if a skilled lawyer is retained.

Although many employees do choose to hire representation, there are plenty of examples of plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination cases. In one such case, a man named Freddy Green went up against his employer and won in court on a racial discrimination charge. He also proved his EEOC claim. Mr. Green sued based on wrongful termination and won at trial in his pro se case.

When discrimination is an issue, it is very important to weigh the case at hand before proceeding with or without an attorney. There are many plaintiff pro se won verdict employment discrimination examples, but sometimes legal representation just makes the process go more smoothly for the victim.

Traditionally, anti-discriminatory laws in the workplace have not covered gay and lesbian workers, but as the progressive movement toward equality for all ethnicities, women, and sexual orientation gains momentum, so does the pendulum for change. Employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is now explicitly illegal in eighteen states and the District of Columbia. Six states have also taken measures to combat employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation for transgendered people.

Because the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission did not outright recognize employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation alone, several measures have been taken to ensure equality. The Office of Personnel Management, for example, interprets “conduct” as inclusive of sexual orientation, and thus protects employers from firing employees on this basis alone.

But in 2000, Executive Order 13152 amended the Equal Employment Opportunity Act to include prohibition of employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. This reflects the emerging viewpoint that all people deserve equal treatment, perhaps in part propagated by the 1989 Supreme Court ruling that discrimination on the basis of sex stereotyping violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The case represented a woman, last name Hopkins, who was denied a promotion on the basis that she was not “feminine enough.” The court awarded Hopkins with $371,000 in damages plus attorney’s fees.

Sexual stereotyping is an unfortunate reverberation of archaic gender roles.
This is exhibited in the case of Bruno vs. City of Crown Point. A female interviewee was asked how her spouse would feel about her taking on employment, perhaps insinuating his own belief that it is a woman’s sole responsibility to tend to children. Thankfully, laws were implemented that sought to divert this negative and irrational ideology from the sphere of public opinion.

This motif of political progress is in full force today to help combat the disease of prejudice in America. Employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is waning – due in large part to the efforts of lawyers and activists who feel they have been denied rights to work because they did not fit in with the expectations of the status quo.

Several cases are cropping up in which gays, lesbians, and transsexuals are suing employers for firing them over their sexual orientation. One such case of this employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation involves Jason Reed, a man who claims he was fired for taking an approved bereavement for his partner’s deceased father.

We have come a long way in our effort to protect all citizens equally, but the fact remains that as long as these anti-discriminatory laws are in effect, we have a long way to go.

A summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act can help those that are concerned that they have been the victim of age discrimination. By understanding the rights laid out by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which dates from 1967 and protects the rights of workers aged 40 or older, informed employees and those looking for work can be sure that they are being treated fairly in the work environment. The following is a summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which can help all interested parties, from employers to employees, learn the facts.

What does the Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibit?
Besides a broad ban of against age discrimination, the following is a summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act and what it specifically prohibits:

• Discrimination in hiring, wages, promotions and layoffs or firing.
• Any claims of preference in age or age limitations made in job postings or job advertisements
• Refusing to give benefits to older employees.
• Mandatory retirement in most in most areas of work and phased elimination of mandatory retirement for tenured workers, like college professors.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act only applies to employers of 20 or more employees. These 20 employees may include overseas employees as well. It also only applies to employers that are involved in interstate commerce.

What are the exceptions?
Following is a summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act exceptions:

• An employer may reduce benefits based on age if the reduced cost is the same as the cost of full benefits for younger employees.
• Mandatory retirement is allowed for executives over the age of 65 in high ranking positions if they are entitled to a pension, which is over the minimum yearly amount.
• An age limit may be specified where age has been shown to be a (quoting from the act) “bona fide occupational qualifications reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the particular business.” This is called the BFOQ, for bona fide occupational qualifications. This can include obvious exceptions, such as a young woman hired to play a young character in a film, or in the interest of public safety, such as pilots or bus drivers.
• This law does not apply to employees of the state.

What kind of claims can be alleged?
The following is a summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act claims that may be made:

• Less favorable treatment with a discriminatory motive, or Discrimination of Disparate Treatment
• An employment policy that seems neutral on the surface but affects the members of the protected group, or Discrimination by Disparate Impact.
• Creating a hostile work environment, whose effect unreasonably interferes with the employee, or Age-Based Harassment.

Those that have read this summary on Age Discrimination in Employment Act and find that they have experienced these abuses should consult the opinion of a lawyer to understand how they can be compensated.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 actually has it roots in the Civil Rights Act that became law three years earlier. The Civil Rights Act includes Title VII which states that discrimination in the workplace based on race, color, sex, religion and national origin must be banned, but age was not included at that time. In 1967, the US Labor Department completed its study on the pervasiveness of age discrimination and found that it was a problem. Congress reacted with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. It protected workers aged 40 to 65. This breakthrough law would be updated as needed through the years and will undoubtedly see changes in the future. In this article, we’ll discuss some of the major changes to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967.

In 1978 President Jimmy Carter transferred enforcement of the ADEA to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. That same year, Congress extended the limit of protection to the age of 70. It wouldn’t be until nine years later that the upper age limit would be removed, protecting all older citizens from discrimination, no matter what age.

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 amended all the major civil rights laws in the nation, including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. This act overturned several recent decisions by the Supreme Court that made it difficult for age biased plaintiffs to win their cases. However, the Supreme Court did rule for them in the case of O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp. in 1996, stating that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 doesn’t require an employee that was fired to prove that his replacement was under the age of 40. Four years later, however, the Supreme Court seemed to go against those that have suffered from age discrimination once again, stating that state government agencies are protected by the Constitution from being sued for money damages.

The year 2002 saw close to 20,000 complaints of age discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which was an all time record. The prime factors for these many complaints are usually considered to be the combination of a slumping economy and a workforce that is growing older, what with the “Baby Boom” generation starting to reach retirement age. Only one year later, the EEOC won the biggest age discrimination settlement in history, totaling $250 million in back pay for 1,700 public safety officers in California.

Several changes have been made over the last forty years to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and not all of them have necessarily been beneficial to those that suffer from age discrimination. As society changes with time, there will undoubtedly be changes made to this act in the future.

Employment discrimination is an issue that touches many Americans. The landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 did away with segregation and ensured working rights for African Americans and included the famous Title VII which prohibits employers to discriminate based on race, sex, religion or national origin. Since that time, a number of employment discrimination cases have made their way to the Supreme Court and have effectively changed how employment discrimination law is practiced today. In this article, we’ll take a look at a few of the employment discrimination cases that were judged by the Supreme Court and have shaped the law as we know it today.

The first of the employment discrimination cases of note, Griggs v. Duke Power Company, dates from 1971 and was an important victory for African Americans. The Court decided that it is unlawful to expect that certain educational requirements be met or to administer intelligence tests that are not related to the job to be filled. In many cases, these requirements or intelligence tests were an underhanded way to exclude African Americans from being considered for employment.

The next of the important employment discrimination cases was an important victory for pregnant teachers – 1974’s Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur. At that time, public school boards had what would be considered archaic rules about at what point pregnant teachers would be forced to take their maternity leave. The Cleveland School Board required that pregnant teachers take unpaid leave five months before the expected childbirth and would not be permitted to return until the semester after the child reached the age of three months. Another school board noted in the case, in Chesterfield County, Virginia, required teachers to take unpaid leave four months and to give notice six months before the birth and would not be eligible for the next school year after the first day of school. The Court recognized that each pregnant teacher’s case is different and that many are able to continue working through the end of the pregnancy, making these imposed rules by the school boards violations of the pregnant teachers’ guarantee of due process.

Many of the employment discrimination cases have to do with sexual discrimination. In 1986, the case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson found that a claim of a “hostile environment” can be considered a form of sexual discrimination. The Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Serv., Inc. case in 1987 found that same-sex harassment can be considered a form of sexual harassment as covered by Title VII. In 1988, the case of Faragher v. City of Boca Raton found that an employer may be found liable for sexual discrimination caused by a supervisor, but liability will be dependant on the reasonableness of both the employers and the employee’s conduct.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act passed in 1967 ended a lot of woes for employees who often felt the doors close on their careers and room for advancement after the age of 40. The law, however, is not always fully understood by employees or employees.

While the Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits basing hiring, firing or layoff decisions based on age, it does not give employees age 40 or over free reign to do as they please. Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, employers are still able to base decisions on performance, abilities and skills. The act is designed to protect employees from unwarranted decisions. It is not meant to punish employers or impede their abilities to see business get done.

Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, employers are prohibited from:

• Discriminating in regard to hiring, firing, promotion, pay, benefits, assignments, training opportunities and even layoffs in regard to age.
• From refusing equal benefits to employees because of age, unless a reduced package for older employees costs the same as the benefits offered to younger workers. (This is a tricky loophole in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act that many employers do not choose to exercise.)
• Taking retaliatory action against an employee who files a claim of age discrimination or takes part in an investigation into the claim of another.

While the Age Discrimination in Employment Act applies to all employers with 20 or more employees, there are a few exceptions to the law. There are certain circumstances where it is deemed lawful to hire, fire and promote based on age. Under these circumstances, an employer must be able to approve a “bona fide” occupational qualification. This loophole tends to come into play within career fields that are extremely physical in nature.

Although the Age Discrimination in Employment Act protects employees and prohibits employers from taking certain actions, workers age 40 or over must still prove their mettle for employment. Employers still retain the rights to dismiss with just cause as long as age does not play a role in the decision.

Workers, who feel they have been the victim of an Age Discrimination in Employment Act violation, have several options at their disposal. They can file claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or hire an attorney to do so. Claims are generally handled by local level offices within most states.

Following the Age Discrimination in Employment Act is not a difficult undertaking for an employer. If policies, procedures and practices spell out decision-making based on abilities and not age or other discriminatory factors, an employer should be free and clear.

United States federal law prohibits the practice of employment discrimination. Employers who are found guilty of violations of the law can face rather stiff financial penalties and other actions that simply combine to show that employment discrimination is not something to get involved with.

Under federal law, employment discrimination can take place under a few different circumstances that impact most businesses. These include:

• During employee hiring and firing
• In regard to the pay, assignments or classifications given employees
• During advertising, recruitment, training and testing of employees
• In regard to any fringe benefits, pensions or other forms of compensation given employees

To protect against charges of employment discrimination, employers must take steps to ensure their actions are fair, unbiased by certain factors and generally only hinge on qualifications, abilities and demonstrated practices of employees themselves.

The buzz words employers need to watch out for in regard to employment discrimination are many. In general, employers are prohibited from:

• Harassing employees on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, sex, age or disability.
• Engaging in any act of retaliation against an employee who files a complaint of employment discrimination or takes part in an ongoing investigation about discrimination.
• Making hiring decisions based on stereotypes based on sex, age, religion, color, national origin, disability and so on. To be safe and avoid employment discrimination charges, employers should make hiring, firing and promotion decisions based solely on an employee’s qualifications and demonstrated performance. Take care with the wording of employment advertisements, as well. These can sometimes be used to prove discrimination claims.
• Making hiring decisions based on a potential employee’s marriage to someone based on color, race, religion, origin, disability and so on. The potential employee or the employee’s spouse should not be a factor in hiring, period. This is the best way to avoid a claim of discrimination based on these factors.

Employers that want to protect themselves against claims of discrimination should take measures to ensure fair practices throughout their business structures. Employees should be rewarded or reprimanded solely on their performance and abilities. Never allow other factors to come into play and the chances of a claim being filed are minimized.

Employment discrimination is a very big issue facing employers today. To protect a business, it is best to use the best judgment when hiring, firing or promoting. Creating uniform policies and procedures and ensuring they are followed can go a long way toward this end. Even with the best laid plans, however, complaints are sometimes still filed.