Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Age Discrimination In Employment Act At Thirty: Where It's Been, Where It Is Today, Where It's Going, Howard C. Eglit
The Age Discrimination In Employment Act At Thirty: Where It's Been, Where It Is Today, Where It's Going, Howard C. Eglit
University of Richmond Law Review
Thirty-three years ago, in the course of debating the legislation that eventually was enacted into law as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress began-albeit very tentatively-to address age discrimination in the workplace. While it rejected attempts to amend the 1964 bill to include age within the then-pending menu of proscribed bases for workplace decision-making, i.e., race, color, national origin, religion, and sex, Congress did direct the Secretary of Labor to undertake a study to ascertain the nature and extent of age bias in employment and to make recommendations for dealing with this discrimination, if it in fact existed.
Does Pretext Plus Age Equal The Sum Of The Judgement?, Susan Childers North
Does Pretext Plus Age Equal The Sum Of The Judgement?, Susan Childers North
University of Richmond Law Review
In deciding cases under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), several circuit courts of appeals have interpreted the tripartite test set forth in McDonnell Douglas v. Green to mean that a plaintiff could prevail in proving individual disparate treatment by proving a prima facie case and that the employer's proffered reasons were a pretext. The Third, Seventh and Eighth Circuits concluded that a showing that a proffered justification is pretextual is equivalent to a finding that the employer intentionally discriminated. In other words, "the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law when, in the third stage …