Age Discrimination Articles
Burden of Proof in Age Discrimination Cases
- Details
- Created on Wednesday, 01 July 2009 12:07
Click here to download a pdf copy of this article
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that employees bringing age claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act always have the burden of proving that age was the “but for” reason for any adverse action. Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., No. 08-441 (June 18, 2009). The Court stated that even when the plaintiff can show that both legal and unlawful discriminatory reasons played a part in an employer’s decision, the burden never shifts to the employer to prove it would have taken the same action regardless of the employee’s age.
Disparate Impact Claims Valid Under the ADEA
- Details
- Created on Friday, 01 July 2005 12:18
Click here to download a pdf copy of this article
On March 30, 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court held that employees could bring disparate impact based suits under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”). Smith v. City of Jackson, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 2931. Expanding the disparate impact theory to age cases now permits a plaintiff to claim that a neutral employment practice that has a disproportionate negative impact on older workers is unlawful, without having to prove discriminatory intent.
Schaffer Law, LLC - 50 Bainton Road - West Hartford, CT. 06117 - Phone: (860) 216-1965 - Fax: (860) 606-9595 - This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.