EEOC: Selected Pending And Resolved Age Discrimination In Employment Act Cases

2011

Bank of Albuquerque: (D. N.M.) filed 12/27/11 by Phoenix District Office – The Commission alleges that two charging parties, long-time management employees, were discharged and disciplined because of their gender and age; a third employee was disciplined because of her gender and age. More specifically, the Commission alleges that Defendant terminated and disciplined the charging parties for reasons not applied to younger male managers and employees.

Texas Roadhouse: (D. Mass.) filed 9/30/11 by New York District Office – The Commission alleges that a class of applicants for “front of the house” and other visible positions in the restaurant was discriminated against by Defendant when it failed to hire them because of their age. Since at least 2007, the Commission alleges that Defendant has hired significantly few “front of the house” employees 40 or older, has instructed its managers to hire younger job applicants, and hiring officials have told older, unsuccessful applicants across the nation that, “there are younger people here who can grow with the company;” “you seem older to be applying for this job” and “do you think you would fit in?”

Western Energy Services: (D. N.M.) filed 9/29/11 by Phoenix District Office – The Commission alleges that charging parties, ages 61 and 72, were discriminated against because of their age when Defendant failed to hire them for electrician positions. Defendant allegedly determined they were “too old” to perform the job duties despite being the next union members on the hiring list. Despite their vast work experience and qualifications, Defendant hired two lesser qualified electricians in their 20s.

Trinity Protection Services: (E.D. Cal.) filed 9/27/11 by San Francisco District Office – The Commission alleges that at least four older male security guards were discharged because of their age, ranging from 66 to 73-years-old. Initially, the four men and three women were dismissed because of their scores on an arms requalification shoot. However, the three women, ages 28, 29, and 50 were invited to return and re-qualify. Trinity asserted that it brought the younger women back early because it was “hurting for employees.” However, the EEOC’s investigation found that the company did not extend the same invitation to reapply to the older men.

American Samoa Government: (D. Haw.) filed 8/30/11 by Los Angeles District Office – In its first lawsuit filed against the government of American Samoa, the Commission alleges that a class of older workers were discriminated against because of their age. According to the lawsuit, the American Samoa government initiated a campaign in the U.S. territory to remove older employees from the government workforce in order to open up positions for younger people who were seeking employment.

2009

Hi-Line Electric Corp. Inc.: (N.D. Tex.) filed 9/30/09 by Dallas District Office – The Commission alleges that a class of applicants over age 40 was excluded from consideration for hire as Territory Managers because of their age. Defendant, a tools manufacturing and marketing company, developed hiring criteria that excluded applicants older than age 50.

Ruby Tuesday: (W.D. Pa.) filed 9/30/09 by Philadelphia District Office – The Commission alleges that since at least January 2005, a class of applicants over the age of 40 was denied hire for restaurant positions at six of Defendant’s locations in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

• Celebrating the Resilience of Low-Income Women
• CEOs Get to Retire Comfortably. Workers Like Me Deserve the Same.
• Jobs Increased 339,000 In May, Unemployment Up 0.3% To 3.7%
• The decline of job creation at new establishments
• Contractor faces 2 serious citations after US Department of Labor finds safety failures led to welder’s death at Bonner Bridge demolition project