An examination of EEOC regulations regarding waivers of rights and claims under the ADEA.
The United States Supreme Court recently held that a former employee who received severance payments from her emplo.
This article discusses whether an employee can file a civil lawsuit for age discrimination without first resorting to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing or the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for redress.
On June 5, 1998, the EEOC published a final regulation to be effective July 6, 1998 on agreements that waive rights.
On January 26, 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employee could sue her employer for age discrimination un.
Shorette was a 60-year-old manager of a branch store of a local Maine pharmacy chain.
In an opinion issued February 24, 2004, the United States Supreme Court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA") does not prevent an employer from favoring older employees over younger employees.
Federal law prohibits employment discrimination because of race, color, national origin, legal alienage, sex, pregn.
This article reviews three interesting employment law developments, each of which reminds us of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' words that the law does not exist in a vacuum but responds to "felt needs of society." Each of these developments also underscores the fact that the workplace is one of the most regulated areas of American life.
The US Supreme Court recently addressed to what extent an employer may discriminate against its younger workers in favor of its most senior employees.
The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that employers must strictly comply with the Older Workers Benefit P.
Fact sheet from the Department of Health and Human Services which describes the rights of older people in federally funded Health and Human Services Programs.
This newsletter addresses employment law developments in two areas: (1) employer liability for providing a "negativ.
Interviewing and selecting candidates poses one of the more difficult challenges employers' face. A skillfully cond.
This fact sheet gives an overview of what constitutes race/color discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).
In a watershed decision on March 30, 2005, the United States Supreme Court held an employer may be held liable for age discrimination based on a facially neutral employment policy that has a disproportionate effect, or "disparate impact," on older workers. In Smith v. City of Jackson, Mississippi, the Supreme Court resolved an issue of longstanding uncertainty among the lower courts, finding that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Age Discrimination In Employment Act ("ADEA").
When employers decide to reduce the size of their workforces, or to terminate an employee who is over 40 years of age, they often offer severance pay in exchange for a release and waiver of legal claims by the terminated employees. In 1990, Congress passed the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act ("Older Workers Act"), which established procedural rules employers must follow in seeking such a waiver from employees who are over 40 years of age.
In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that workers age 40 and over do not have to prove an intent to discriminate and may allege age discrimination under the ADEA under a "disparate impact" theory. The proof required for such an action, however, may be more favorable to employers than in other discrimination cases.
Rosenberg charged Merrill Lynch with age discrimination, gender discrimination and sexual harassment.
This article discusses the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issuance of final regulations governing waivers of rights and claims under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
In 1967, Congress enacted the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) to combat discrimination in the employmen.
Legislative Enactments . The Higher Education Amendments of 1998 The President recent.