Important Notice:
This site has moved to, please update your bookmarks. If you were looking for a specific post, you can use the site search option or archives at the new domain to find it. Thank you!

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Age Discrimination

Our friends over at Overlawyered write about the tale of a 63 year old woman who was terminated and then sued for age discrimination.

Yawn. I know you are thinking that this is about the most boring post ever. (Well, there was one that had a heated discussion about armpits...) It's not. And the reason it's not boring is the company this woman is suing, for age discrimination is...drum roll please...the AARP. That's right, the American Association of Retired Persons (or people--too lazy to look it up right now).

Geez Louise. I know nothing concerning this case. Nothing, so I'm not commenting on merit. I'm just commenting that either we should be aware because anyone can violate discrimination laws or we should be aware because no matter how much we do, you are always in danger of being sued.


Jon Hyman said...

Your conclusion hits the nail right on the head. No employment decision is bulletproof. The best a company can hope for is to make decisions based on legitimate business reasons and let the chips fall where they may if the lawsuit comes. At least if there is a legitimate (as opposed to a fabricated or pretextual) business reason to fall back on you have a real chance to come out victorious (although some businesses would wonder how a six-figure legal bill can be construed a victory).

Bonnie Lowe said...

I think Jon's last few words are the key. It's often cheaper to settle claims (even completely bogus ones) than defend against them. This makes many companies with such "bottom-line" policies tempting targets for professional victims.

Dataceptionist said...

The overlawyered link is broken :(

My very small company has just settled with an ex employee who was flat out lying, and they could prove through and through she was flat out lying, but it was miles cheaper to settle, our little company just couldn't afford her evil evil ways.

Anonymous said...

I find it interesting that the HR professionals here are automatically siding with the company without even knowing any details about this case.

Anonymous said...

Huh, anon? Not a single commenter sided with AARP! Most just pointed out that it's often cheaper to settle than fight regardless of the merits of the case.

Anonymous said...

I’m not at all surprised that a company like AARP, would wind up in a situation like this.
There is no difference between them, and any other company regarding HR management.
What I mean is, the mind set is all the same across the board.
There is very little that distinguishes one companies EEO responsibilities, from another's.

I’m 51 and trying to find a new job, and I have never experienced so much discrimination against me for age in my life.
One or two companies have been quite bold and in my face about it. It shows a complete lack in ability of these companies, to manage people, its assets or it’s self regarding law. You wouldn’t want these companies in your community anyway, much less work for one.