Dive Brief:
- Commercial electrical contractor Hatzel & Buehler will pay $500,000 to settle U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that a vice president for its New Jersey branch rejected multiple job applicants because of their age, EEOC said in a press release Friday.
- According to the complaint in EEOC v. Hatzel & Buehler, Inc., dated June 2023, the candidates applied for estimator and project manager positions, including two named candidates ages 65 and 58. EEOC alleged that, during a conversation with a third-party recruiter who worked with the 65-year-old applicant, the executive said that that applicant did not fit his “ideal age range” for the job, ages 30-45.
- EEOC also claimed that the vice president failed to retain job applicant and hiring-related records in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. As part of the settlement, the vice president will be prohibited from making final decisions on which candidates to interview or hire for the affected positions, EEOC said. Hatzel & Buehler denied the allegations and any violations of the ADEA or Title VII.
Dive Insight:
The case is one of several in which an employers’ alleged use of coded language became potential evidence in an age discrimination claim. In one 2023 example, EEOC alleged that Exact Sciences discriminated against a 49-year-old applicant whom it claimed was turned down because the company sought “more junior” applicants. The company settled with EEOC for $90,000 but denied the commission’s allegations.
Earlier in July, EEOC entered a settlement agreement with retailer Dollar General over allegations that older workers were harassed by district managers and threatened with termination. One month prior, Raytheon faced a class-action suit alleging that company job postings targeted recent college graduates.
“Job candidates should be evaluated based on their qualifications, not their age,” Debra Lawrence, regional attorney at EEOC’s Philadelphia office, said in the agency’s press release. “The EEOC will continue to hold employers accountable for age-discriminatory recruitment and hiring practices.”
The ADEA prohibits job discrimination against people who are ages 40 and older, even when both the victim and the person who inflicts discrimination are both over age 40. The law applies to any term or condition of employment, according to EEOC.
Additionally, the ADEA requires employers to keep all payroll records for a period of three years. The law also requires employers to keep on file any employee benefit plan and written seniority or merit system for the full period that the plan or system is in effect as well as at least one year after the plan or system’s termination.
In spite of the ADEA’s protections, however, age discrimination continues to be a persistent issue facing U.S. workplaces. Congress has attempted to strengthen age bias protections multiple times, including last December, when a bipartisan U.S. House of Representatives group introduced the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act. A separate effort supported by advocates including media personality Gretchen Carlson has sought to end mandatory arbitration for age discrimination claims.
