This paper explores age discrimination and the act of businesses forcing retirement on employees. (2011), and Hale's relationship with ABF, a trucking company based in Arkansas with a terminal in Chattanooga, Tennessee. .
The case should be thoroughly studied to fully understand how the discrimination laws, under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC) are interpreted in the court systems for this case. Two issues were brought forward, age discrimination and working in a hostile work environment. Circuit courts, appellate courts, and judges, interrupt laws differently and review past cases for effective decisions on current cases.
Key phrases: age discrimination, hostile work environment, injunctive relief, discovery, discriminatory animus.
.
Age Discrimination and Mandatory Retirement.
The United States Supreme Court has engaged in taking an active role in shaping the employment discrimination laws under Title VII of the Civil Rights Acts of 1963 and 1991, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), as well as the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of (ADEA)(Jennings, 2012). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is also important to older workers because its interpretation influences the interpretation of the ADEA and because older female workers and older minority workers are often subject to double or multiple discrimination. Of the employment discrimination claims that are filed with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) a relatively small number are age discrimination cases. The ADEA prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of age. This includes decisions about hiring, firing, layoffs, pay, benefits, promotions, demotions, performance reviews, or any other condition of employment (Fleck, 2012). This paper will look at what point can a person be forced to retire because of age, what types of legal action can you take and what types of injunctive relief are allowed.
