Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is the federal law governing age discrimination. It was enacted in 1967 to promote the employment of older workers based on ability rather than age, prevent discrimination, and help solve the problems that arise with an aging workforce. Many states also have laws prohibiting age discrimination and may have more restrictions than the ADEA. State-by-state comparision of 50 employment laws in 50 states, including age discrimination For a limited time, receive a FREE HR report, HR's Guide to Workers' Comp. This comprehensive report includes workers' comp basics, a lexicon of helpful terms, a workers' comp checklist to help you manage the process, and information about your employees' role in workplace safety. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits an employer from refusing to hire, firing, or otherwise discriminating against an employee age 40 or older, solely on the basis of age. Thus, an employer can't deny an employee pay or fringe benefits when the only justification is age. Nor may an employer classify employees into groups on the basis of age in a way that unfairly deprives workers of employment opportunities. For example, an employer may not relegate all older workers to a particular level of employment within a company and then decline to promote them. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act functions similarly to other federal discrimination laws, such as Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). However, the ADEA has its own rules concerning which employers are covered and other requirements. Mastering HR: Discrimination Who qualifies as an employer under the ADEA? The Age Discrimination in Employment Act defines \"employer\" to include every individual, partnership, association, labor organization, corporation, business trust, legal representative, or organized group of persons who (1) is engaged in an industry affecting commerce (most every industry will affect commerce within the meaning of the ADEA); and (2) has 20 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year. To be covered by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, an employer must: Be engaged in an industry affecting commerce; Have 20 or more employees; and Have an employment relationship with the claimed employee. HR Guide to Employment Law: A practical compliance reference manual covering 14 topics, including discrimination Who qualifies as an employee under the ADEA? Whether an individual is an employee for purposes of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act depends mainly on the conduct of the worker. Very few people are expressly excluded from the definition of \"employee\" in the ADEA. Independent contractors are not employees within the meaning of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and are not entitled to its protections.There must be an employer/employee relationship for the ADEA to come into play. People elected to office in a state or a political subdivision of the state are excluded, as are the personal staff, policymaking appointees, and immediate advisers of the elected officer. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act protects employees who are at least 40 years old. There's no cap, so all workers 40 and older are protected by the ADEA, with a few exclusions and exceptions. For instance, an elected official and her staff and \"policy making appointees\" are excluded from the ADEA. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act carves out a compulsory retirement exception for \"bona fide executives\" or \"high policymakers\" - i.e., an employer may impose compulsory retirement on any employee age 65 or older who is either a bona fide executive or high policymaker and who is entitled to receive a nonforfeitable annual retirement benefit of at least $44,000. Audit your policies and practices dealing with age discrimination and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act with the Employment Practices Self-Audit Workbook Other federal laws affecting the ADEA In 1990, Congress further extended the reach of the Age Discriminatin in Employment Act by passing the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA) as a way to further ensure that worker benefits were protected from age discrimination. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, signed into law in January 2009, changes when the statute of limitations begins for workers' claims of pay discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to declare that an unlawful employment practice occurs not only when a discriminatory pay decision or practice is adopted but also when the employee becomes subject to the decision or practice, as well as each additional application of that decision or practice. In other words, each time compensation is paid. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII, the federal law that prohibits most workplace harassment and discrimination, covers all private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions with 15 or more employees. In addition to prohibiting discrimination against workers because of race, color, national origin, religion, and sex, those protections have been extended to include barring against discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, sex stereotyping, and sexual harassment of employees. Currently, Title VII doesn't include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.However federal legislation adding sexual orientation as a protected class against discrimination (the Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA)), has been proposed in recent years. Many states have employment discrimination and harassment laws as well and may include even more protected classes - such as marital status and sexual orientation - than Title VII covers. Mastering HR Report: Discrimination For a limited time, receive a FREE HR report, HR's Guide to Workers' Comp. This comprehensive report includes workers' comp basics, a lexicon of helpful terms, a workers' comp checklist to help you manage the process, and information about your employees' role in workplace safety. Pay discrimination The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was signed into law on Jan. 29, 2009, changes when the statute of limitations begins for workers'pay discrimination claims under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). It declares that an unlawful employment practice occurs not only when a discriminatory pay decision or practice is adopted but also when the employee becomes subject to the decision or practice, as well as each additional application of that decision or practice. In other words, each time compensation is paid. HR Guide to Employment Law: A practical compliance reference manual covering 14 topics, including discrimination Harassment The legal theory of harassment evolved out of legal interpretations of the discrimination prohibitions in Title VII. The law itself doesn't mention the term harassment at all but the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted that a hostile work environment will violate the prohibitions of Title VII. When harassment is so pervasive and severe that it actually alters an employee's terms or conditions of employment and creates an abusive working environment, a violation of the law has occurred. Title VII and disparate impact The legal consideration of a Title VII disparate impact claim consists of a three-part analysis. First, the employee must identify and prove that a particular employment practice \"causes a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.\" Generally, the employee makes this showing of causation through the use of statistical evidence, which the employer may challenge. If the employer demonstrates that the employee's statistical evidence is unreliable, the employee will have failed to meet her burden of demonstrating adverse impact. At this point, the case (at least the disparate impact claim) would be over. If, however, the statistical evidence establishes that the challenged practice had a substantial adverse impact on the protected group, the employee will have met her initial burden. Second, assuming that the employee establishes a disparate impact, the focus turns to the company, which must demonstrate that the \"challenged practice is job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.\" In this context, \"business necessity\" means that the challenged employment practice has a \"manifest relationship to the employment in question\" and that the employer had a significant or compelling need to maintain the practice despite its disparate impact. Third, even if the employer proves business necessity, the employee still may prevail by proving that the employer refused to adopt \"an alternative employment practice\" that would accomplish the same business objectives, but which would have a smaller adverse impact. In other words, pretext would be shown if the employee demonstrates that \"other tests or selection devices, without a similarly undesirable [discriminatory] effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest in 'efficient and trustworthy workmanship.'\" In short, for the employer to successfully defend against a Title VII disparate impact claim, it must show that the employment practice at issue was consistent with business necessity and that there was no other way with less adverse impact to achieve its legitimate business purpose. State-by-state comparison of 50 employment laws in all 50 states Title VII and retaliation On January 26, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the scope of Title VII's anti-retaliation protections. Specifically, in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn., the Supreme Court held that Title VII's anti-retaliation provision protects not only employees who report complaints of harassment/discrimination on their own initiative, but also employees who speak out about harassment/discrimination while answering questions during an employer's internal investigation of a harassment/discrimination complaint. Title VII and the EEOC Before an employee can file a complaint against an employer under Title VII, he first must file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). If the EEOC finds that the employee's claim has merit, it may sue on his behalf. Otherwise, it will issue him a \"right-to-sue\" letter, and he then can file a complaint and begin the litigation process. Employees and the EEOC can sue for lost wages, benefits, reinstatement, and attorneys' fees. Compensatory damages (damages for wages and emotional distress) are \"capped\" by Title VII and the amount allowed per employee will vary depending on the size of the employer