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

AGE DISCRIMINATION CASES RESOLVED:

2012

Hawaii Healthcare Professionals, Inc: (D. Haw.) resolved 7/19/12 by Los Angeles District Office – The Commission alleged that charging party, a then-54-year-old office coordinator, was terminated based on age after Defendant’s owner ordered a manager to fire charging party because she “looks old, sounds old on the telephone,” and is “like a bag of bones.” Case settled for $193,236 in monetary relief and injunctive relief.

Tempe Elementary School District No. 3: (D. Ariz.) resolved 5/23/12 by Phoenix District Office – The Commission alleged that the charging party and a group of retired employees were discriminatorily compensated for accrued leave based on their age. More specifically, Defendant maintained a facially age-discriminatory early retirement incentive plan which compensates retiring employees for accumulated general leave at rates which vary based on age, so that employees who retire at age 61 or older are compensated for accumulated leave at lower rates than the rates paid to younger employees who retire between ages 55 and 60. Case settled $148,162.53 to 49 class members and injunctive relief including training, revision of retirement policy among other things.

Advance Components: (N.D. Tex.) resolved 5/18/12 by Dallas District Office – The Commission alleged that charging party, a 64-year-old national sales manager with 20 years of experience with the company, was subjected to ageist comments by Defendant’s executive vice president and general manager. Defendant’s management repeatedly expressed his preference to hire younger salesmen and referred to charging party as “old fashioned.” A day after defendant fired charging party, it hired a man in his 30s. Case settled for $201,000 in monetary damages and injunctive relief.

Star Tex Gasoline and Oil Distributors: (S.D. Tex.) resolved 5/16/12 by Dallas District Office – The Commission alleged that charging party, a former fire chief with extensive relevant work experience, was not hired for a truck driver position with Defendant because of his age. Defendant’s hiring official focused entirely on charging party’s age rather than qualifications and experience during the interview. Case settled for $10,000 in monetary relief and injunctive relief.

Central Freight Lines: (N.D. Tex.) resolved 5/10/12 by Dallas District Office – The Commission alleged that a class of employees was discriminated against based on age. The EEOC alleges that Defendant used a reduction-in-force as a ruse to fire eight dockworkers, some of whom had worked at the company for 20 or more years and were approximately 50 years old and older. Defendant subjected this class of workers to names like “grandpa,” “old farts” and “old bastards.” Eventually, the company replaced the class of workers with younger hires. Case settled for $400,000 in monetary relief and injunctive relief.

Minnesota Board of Public Defense; Minnesota Department of Commerce; Minnesota Department Human Services; Minnesota Department of Corrections; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; Minnesota Department of Public Safety: (D. Minn.; 8th Cir.) resolved six lawsuits between 12/9/10 – 5/1/12 by Chicago District Office – In six separate lawsuits, the Commission alleged that Defendants had an unlawful “Age 55 Cliff” retirement policy, which penalized workers who retired after the age of 55 by denying them the same benefits that those who retired at age 55 received. Under the policy an employee who retired by age 55 received payment of the employer’s share of insurance premiums (ranging from 85% to 100% of the total amount of the premium) until age 65. An employee, who retired after age 55, received nothing. 8th Circuit affirmed decision that Defendants plans were discriminatory under the ADEA. Cases settled for just under $2 million in monetary damages for approximately 85 people. The state also paid the employers’ share of health and dental insurance to those claimants who were eligible for it but for their age.

Kelley Drye & Warren: (S.D. N.Y.) resolved 4/11/12 by New York District Office – The Commission alleged that Kelley Drye & Warren, a law firm with over 300 attorneys, had a system in which attorneys who practiced law after turning 70 years of age received dramatically reduced compensation compared to similarly productive younger attorneys solely because of their age. The EEOC further charged that Defendant unlawfully retaliated against an attorney who had practiced law at the firm for over 40 years, by further reducing his compensation after he complained about this discriminatory policy and filed a charge with the EEOC. Case settled for $574,000 for one attorney who continued to practice at the firm after he turned 70 and end of policy requiring partners to give up equity in firm once reached 70 years old.

DXP Enterprises: (D. N.M.) resolved 2/16/12 by Phoenix District Office – The Commission alleged that charging party was hired and subsequently fired by Defendant when it learned that she had a prior back injury in violation of the ADA and ADEA. Case settled for $120,000 in monetary relief and injunctive relief.

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