The AARP has informed the U.S. Office of Management and Budget of its priorities and ensuring that older workers achieve equal justice in the workplace is not one of them.
In a Jan. 23 letter to the OMB, AARP CEO JoAnn C. Jenkins listed the following AARP priorities:
Opposing cuts to Medicare.
Preserving Medicaid and long-term services and supports for seniors, children and adults with disabilities.
Lowering prescription drug prices.
Prohibiting private insurers from overcharging older Americans because of their age. Currently, insurers can charge older Americans three times more to provide the same coverage received by younger individuals. (FYI – The AARP is reaping billions through the same of Medigap health insurance.)
Making the medical expense itemized deduction threshold from 10% to 7.5% of adjusted gross income permanent.
Preserving the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which the AARP calls a vital nutrition safety net for older Americans and low-income families.
The AARP (and the EEOC) have done virtually nothing for 50 years to combat epidemic and unaddressed age discrimination in the workplace.
Older workers have been second class citizens since the adoption of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The ADEA is far weaker than Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1963, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin and women. Since its adoption, the ADEA has been further eviscerated by U.S. Supreme Court rulings that make it almost impossible to prevail in an age discrimination lawsuit.
The AARP describes itself as the largest nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing the interests of Americans age 50 and older.
Note:A spokesperson for the EEOC on 2/7/18 announced the EEOC has adopted a procedure to review ethical complaints against the Agency staff. Gary J. Hozempa, a staff attorney in the EEOC Office of Legal Counsel, said he and his team are responsible for “considering ethics issues that arise in the workplace about EEOC employees.” He saId the current head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Carol R. Miaskoff, Associate Legal Counsel, is EEOC’s Designated Agency Ethics Official. PGB
Since EEOC decisions are secret, there is no way of telling how many older workers have had their age discrimination complaints dismissed on spurious and discriminatory grounds.
It came to light last fall that the EEOC upheld two rulings by its appellate division dismissing age discrimination complaints where the federal government ignored objective qualifications and used purely subjective criteria (i.e., cultural fit, poise) to make promotion and hiring decisions. The rulings contradict EEOC stated policy, EEOC rulings in race and sex discrimination cases, and settled federal case law. The rulings go beyond the EEOC’s generally dismissive treatment of age discrimination and reflect actual age bias.
Then it became apparent the EEOC is unaccountable to the public. The EEOC has no appeal process. There is no EEOC ombudsperson to investigate complaints against the agency. Incredibly, the EEOC even lacks a procedure for filing ethical complaints against the EEOC’s so-called “administrative judges.” The EEOC Office of Inspector General takes the position that it is not its job to investigate complaints related to EEOC rulings.
The AARP & EEOC declined to comment on the discriminatory rulings.
Here’s something that will surprise no one but Washington, D.C. bureaucrats – the vast majority of older Americans claim their Social Security benefits long before they reach age 70, incurring a penalty of more than 30 percent .
Roughly three-quarters of Americans claim benefits prior to age 70 because they are not working, need the money, fear Social Security will be cut and suffer from poor health.
About 22 percent of older Americans have a gap of two or more years between retirement and claiming their Social Security Benefits. They rely upon employer-sponsored pensions and other savings to finance the delay.
These were the findings of a nationally representative survey on individuals’ claiming choices called Social Security Claiming Decisions: Survey Evidence. The survey was conducted by economists John B. Shoven of Stanford University, Sita Nataraj Slavov of George Mason University, and David A. Wise of the National Bureau of Economic Research.
It’s hard not to be cynical when the EEOC leadership trumpets its commitment to the ideals of Martin Luther King but ignores the reality of age discrimination in employment and, worse, engages in it.
EEOC Acting Chair Victoria Lipnic tweeted on MLK Day yesterday:
“Every day at the EEOC, we are reminded of Dr. King’s work, his vision, his prophecy. Our work is a deep part of his legacy. His call to service is what each member of the EEOC brings to our work every day.”
That’s a worthy sentiment but the EEOC has yet to walk the talk when it comes to age inequality.
Not only has the EEOC virtually ignored the problem for years but it sanctions age discrimination in hiring by the federal government and actually engages in the practice itself, thereby undermining enforcement of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 in the private sector.
Dr. King understandably focused on the crisis of racial inequality in the United States but his appeal was based on the underlying concept of equal justice for all. One can only wonder whether Dr. King, who was assassinated at age 39, would have recognized that age discrimination is a major hindrance to older minority group workers if he had lived. Continue reading “MLK, the EEOC & Age Discrimination”
For years, there has been litigation over the fact that the internet is being used to screen out the resumes of older workers and deposit them in a digital trash can.
But suddenly the powers that be are taking notice in the wake of a supposed investigative story on Dec. 20 by ProPublica and The New York Times about Facebook permitting employers to exclude older workers from receiving employment and recruitment ads. That’s a good thing but …
That NYT story was based largely upon a Dec. 20 federal class action lawsuit filed by the Communications Workers of America against major employers that use Facebook to screen out older job applicants. And the CWA lawsuit is the latest of several to challenge the use of internet technology to target young job applicants and screen out older job applicants.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court last year refused to hear a case involving a 2010 lawsuit brought by Richard Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. that alleged Reynolds hired recruiters to develop an algorithm that was used to screen out older applicants for job vacancies on CareerBuilder (which settled its part of the case out of court). The legal press (including me) wrote extensively about the case. This matters because it shows that the government has been on notice for years that the internet is being used as a tool to effectuate epidemic age discrimination in hiring. Continue reading “For the “New” News Media, There is No Past, Only a Self-Congratulatory Present”
“They tend to keep in their minds those failures and successful ideas, projects, initiatives, and leaderships, which added or not value throughout their trajectories, as well as things that worked out or not. and are informed by the organization’s past successes and failures. Fundamentally, they are able to provide answers to vital questions,” he writes.
In an era of uncertainty and disruptions, older workers display wisdom and qualities that are “absolutely necessary” to improving organizations.
It’s your opportunity to demand that the EEOC properly enforce the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The Strategic Plan is a framework for the allocation of EEOC resources. You can be sure that employers and their advocates will weigh in.
In recent years, the EEOC has become a lap dog to corporate interests.
A main focus of the EEOC today is providing free mediation to resolve discrimination complaints. Mediation outcomes almost always favor the company – not clueless, unrepresented discrimination victims – while saving employers potentially millions of dollars. For good measure, the EEOC assures discriminatory employers anonymity so that workers back at the farm will remain ignorant.
A New Jersey appeals court has dismissed an age discrimination lawsuit filed by a woman who was fired from her job at Mountain Creek Resort in Vernon, NJ a few hours after she “raised her voice” at her boss upon learning she had to work on Christmas Eve.
A two-judge panel of the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey recently refused to reinstate a lawsuit filed by Karen Murphy, who was fired at the age of 58 after working in the accounts payable department at the resort for 16 years. The lawsuit was originally dismissed on a pre-trial motion for summary judgment filed by the resort.
Appellate Division Judges Harry Carroll and Hany Mawla concluded that Murphy offered “no evidence” that her termination was motivated by age discrimination.
Murphy was fired on Dec. 11, 2012 a few hours after she “raised her voice” at her supervisor, Lindsey Spasova, upon learning that she would have to work on Christmas Eve. Murphy also asserted that younger workers in her department formed “cliques” and that she was excluded from their groups. Continue reading “Another Way to Get Rid of an Older Worker”
A major lawsuit has been filed against a class of “hundreds” of American employers that allegedly “routinely” exclude older workers from receiving employment and recruitment ads on Facebook.
The lawsuit, filed by the Communications Workers of America in the U.S. District Court of Northern California, specifically names three plaintiffs, T-Mobile USA, Inc., Amazon com, Inc. and Cox Media Group, LLC.
The union seeks seek an injunction “to stop America’s leading companies from engaging in unlawful age discrimination in employment.”
According to the lawsuit, Facebook requires employers or employment agencies seeking to post job advertisements to select the age range of Facebook users who will be eligible to receive the ad. The lawsuit alleges that employers routinely target users who are under the age of forty.
This is the latest in a series of lawsuits filed to halt the use of Internet screening tools that target younger workers and screen out older workers.
Here are the results of a Google search of media outlets for news articles on the 50th anniversary of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), the federal law that prohibits consideration of age as a factor in hiring and employment. The search was conducted on mid-day Friday, the very day that Congress passed the ADEA 50 years ago.
When the full name of the ADEA was spelled out, there was one result – a link to a 21-hour old video message by EEOC Acting Chair Victoria Lipnic.