Age Discrimination in Employment
Age Discrimination: Protecting the Rights of Older WorkersAge discrimination is prohibited under both federal and Massachusetts state laws, safeguarding the rights of older employees. In legal terms, an "older" worker is typically defined as anyone aged 40 or above, although concerns about age discrimination commonly arise among employees over 50.
It's worth noting that older employees often face a double discrimination penalty; not only can they lose their jobs due to age-based reasons, but they may also encounter challenges in finding new employment due to the same discriminatory factors. You can also learn more about how these issues affect real-life people by reading some of our age discrimination case studies. Defining Age DiscriminationAge discrimination in the workplace involves treating someone unfavorably based on their age, and it's applicable to individuals aged 40 and above. This means that it's not unlawful to hold biases against younger employees based on age, but it is unlawful to do so against older employees.
Age discrimination can manifest in various employment decisions, including hiring, promotions, disciplinary actions, or terminations. It can take the form of disparate treatment, where an older employee is treated differently from younger counterparts. For example, promoting a less-qualified younger individual over an equally competent older worker or disciplining or terminating an older employee for infractions not applied equally to others can be examples of age discrimination. Another form of age discrimination is disparate impact, where seemingly neutral policies or practices disproportionately affect older workers. Examples include job requirements that are unnecessary for performing the job or expectations related to technology that may be challenging for older employees to meet. Recognizing Age DiscriminationAge discrimination is typically not rooted in hostility toward older workers. Instead, it often stems from economic factors (such as higher salaries for senior employees), concerns about adapting to changes in the workplace, or the anticipation of health issues. Sometimes, differences in management style and approach between younger supervisors and older employees can also contribute.
While decisions solely based on economics (like laying off the most expensive employees) are generally not considered age discrimination, they could be part of the evidence in a broader age discrimination claim if they disproportionately affect older workers or are accompanied by other factors. Watch for comments or remarks related to age or health made by decision-makers, as these can serve as indicators of age discrimination. Examples include questions about retirement plans, direct comparisons to younger colleagues, or statements implying negative assumptions about an older employee's ability to work with technology. The Age and Disability OverlapAge discrimination and disability discrimination protections are separate but sometimes overlap. An older worker recovering from a health issue may experience a shift in their employer's focus toward their age upon returning to work, especially if the health condition highlights age-related concerns.
It's important to know that you are protected from discrimination based on actual or perceived disability. If you are terminated, demoted, or face adverse employment actions in a situation involving both age and disability, it's advisable to consult with an employment attorney to explore the possibility of pursuing both age and disability discrimination claims. |
We're Here to Help.OR
|
Age Discrimination and Severance Agreements
Federal age discrimination laws impose specific requirements on severance agreements that release age-related claims. These requirements include:
The seven-day revocation period is crucial if you haven't consulted with an attorney before the signing deadline and want to maintain the option for the offered severance. However, negotiating after signing within the seven-day period puts you in a weaker position compared to starting negotiations before the 21-day deadline. Seeking legal advice early allows you to evaluate the viability of an age discrimination claim and compare it to the severance offer.
- Providing at least 21 days to consider the agreement before signing it (though you can sign earlier).
- Allowing seven days after signing to revoke the agreement.
- Disclosing positions eligible for layoff (including ages) and identifying who was and wasn't laid off in cases of larger layoffs or reorganizations.
The seven-day revocation period is crucial if you haven't consulted with an attorney before the signing deadline and want to maintain the option for the offered severance. However, negotiating after signing within the seven-day period puts you in a weaker position compared to starting negotiations before the 21-day deadline. Seeking legal advice early allows you to evaluate the viability of an age discrimination claim and compare it to the severance offer.
Time Limits for Discrimination Claims
In most cases, the statute of limitations for discrimination lawsuits, including age discrimination, is 300 days, or roughly 10 months. While some sources may mention a 180-day or six-month deadline under federal law, Massachusetts allows additional time for federal claims.
This 10-month deadline applies to filing the initial complaint with either the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD). If you decide to withdraw your complaint from these agencies, you'll have more time to file a complaint in court. For state claims, you have up to three years from the event that gave rise to the claim.
Here's a practical scenario: If you were terminated on December 21, 2019, you have until October 16, 2020, to file with MCAD or EEOC. Even if you initially file with MCAD and later decide to remove the complaint, you still have until December 21, 2022, to file a civil complaint in court.
However, be aware that MCAD or EEOC processing times can sometimes exceed three years. If your complaint is still pending at MCAD after two and a half years or more, it's advisable to consider withdrawing it and filing in court before the three-year limit expires.
This 10-month deadline applies to filing the initial complaint with either the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD). If you decide to withdraw your complaint from these agencies, you'll have more time to file a complaint in court. For state claims, you have up to three years from the event that gave rise to the claim.
Here's a practical scenario: If you were terminated on December 21, 2019, you have until October 16, 2020, to file with MCAD or EEOC. Even if you initially file with MCAD and later decide to remove the complaint, you still have until December 21, 2022, to file a civil complaint in court.
However, be aware that MCAD or EEOC processing times can sometimes exceed three years. If your complaint is still pending at MCAD after two and a half years or more, it's advisable to consider withdrawing it and filing in court before the three-year limit expires.
Meet Our Employment Lawyers
Emily Smith-Lee is the owner and founder of slnlaw. She is a 1996 graduate of Boston College Law School. She was previously a partner at the Boston office of a large international firm, where she worked for thirteen years before starting the firm that became slnlaw in 2009. She has been recognized as Massachusetts Superlawyer each year since 2013, and in 2018 earned recognition as one of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly's Lawyers of the Year. She has written a book on employment law: Rules of the Road, What You Need to Know About Employment Laws in Massachusetts, and helped thousands of clients on both the employee and employer side with severance and non compete review and negotiation, wage and hour, discrimination and retaliation disputes, and advice about employment law generally.
Rebecca Rogers: Rebecca is a 2006 graduate of Boston College Law School, and has worked with slnlaw since 2013. She previously worked as an intellectual property litigation attorney for Fish & Richardson in Boston, Massachusetts, and clerked for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. Rebecca has helped clients with wage and hour disputes, employment discrimination and retaliation claims, review and negotiation of severance and non compete agreements, and advice to both employees and employers about navigating complex employment situations.
Jenna Ordway: Jenna is a 2013 graduate of Quinnipiac Law School, and also earned an LLM in Taxation from Boston University in 2015. She has been affiliated with slnlaw since 2011, first as a law clerk and then as an attorney. Jenna has been recognized since 2019 as a "Rising Star" by Massachusetts Superlawyers. Jenna has helped clients with review and negotiation of severance and non compete agreements, wage and hour disputes, employment and discrimination claims, and advice to small business owners about employment law and other business matters.
Elijah Bresley: Eli is a 2014 graduate of Seton Hall Law school, and has worked with slnlaw since 2020. He previously worked for a boutique employment law firm outside of Boston, and then for the Labor and Employment department of a large Boston firm. He also spent a year clerking for the judges of the Superior Court in Hartford, Connecticut. Eli has helped clients on the employee and employer side with all varieties of employment law issues, including employment discrimination, retaliation, and wage and hour issues, litigation in MCAD and state and federal courts, and advising employers about employment policies and practices.
Sharleen Tinnin: Sharleen is a 2010 graduate of Northeastern University School of Law, and has been with slnlaw since 2023. Prior to joining slnlaw, she worked with King, Tilden, McEttrick & Brink, P.C. on complex civil litigation matters. She previously worked for the United States Department of Justice, and received an "Excellence in Justice" award in 2017. Sharleen has helped clients with wage and hour, discrimination and retaliation disputes, review and negotiation of severance agreements, and litigation in MCAD and state and federal courts on employment related issues.
How We Can Help
At slnlaw, our experienced employment attorneys are dedicated to protecting your rights against age discrimination in the workplace. We will provide you with expert legal guidance, and help you evaluate the viability of your age discrimination claim. You can use the button below to schedule a call back from a member of our team, or give us a call at 781-784-2322.
|
|
|
|
|
