A state Court of Appeal has ruled that California employers can give younger workers preference over their older counterparts if the moves are economically justified.
The ruling--in the case of an Orange County man denied a transfer in favor of younger, lower-paid co-workers--means that employers may be on safer ground legally when they order layoffs or pay cuts that take a greater toll on older employees.
The unanimous decision, written by California Appellate Justice David G. Sills in Santa Ana, notes that employers cannot lay off older workers based on the belief that they are harder to train in new technologies or are likely to be less productive than younger workers.
But it held that employers can lay off their most highly paid workers even if most of them happen to be over 40--the age in California at which employees are protected from age discrimination--so long as the reason is economic.
James J. Guziak, the Orange attorney who filed the suit, noted that the ruling "has tremendous policy ramifications," but added that he is unsure whether to appeal.
"I'm very concerned that employers will see this decision as an invitation to go out and replace a substantial number of older workers," he said.
It is unclear whether the ruling will have an immediate impact in most California workplaces. Federal courts have generally decided age suits along similar lines since 1993, when the U.S. Supreme Court issued an influential ruling in a pension rights case.
Although some California courts have followed the federal precedents, the issue has remained cloudier in the state. Advocates for workers now worry that the new ruling will hurt experienced, higher-paid employees.
"A lot of older workers already get laid off. I can't help but believe that this decision is going to make it worse," said Brad Seligman, a Berkeley workers rights lawyer.
Guziak said that in the next few weeks he will probably ask the same panel that issued the ruling last Friday to reconsider it.
If the request is rejected, he said, he could then ask the state Supreme Court to review the case or order that the opinion not be published--which would mean it could not be cited as precedent in other cases.
The ruling comes at a time when older workers, because of the national economic boom and the recovery in California, are by some accounts faring better than they have in years in the job market. Still, age discrimination claims remain widespread in the state.
