Age Discrimination

The Supreme Court gave the nation's older workers stronger protections against age bias Thursday, ruling that employers who are sued must prove their layoff policies are reasonable and do not have an unfair effect on employees because of their age. The 7-1 decision puts private companies and public agencies on notice that they must defend the criteria they use for layoffs if the cutbacks disproportionately affect older workers. For example, when employers reduce the workforce, they sometimes rate their workers in deciding who is to be let go. Usually, the ratings focus on specific skills and can include subjective criteria such as "flexibility" or "creativity."

The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided not to decide one of its most closely watched job discrimination cases. The non-decision was unanimous. At issue was whether a laid-off older worker who sued her employer for age bias could rely on the testimony of other older workers who also were fired from the same company.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to consider an appeal brought by a group of IBM Corp. employees who accused the company of age discrimination when it altered its pension plan. The lawsuit could have cost the company $1.4 billion. Kathi Cooper, a former IBM employee, served as the lead plaintiff in a class-action suit brought on behalf of 250,000 current and former IBM workers.

Javon R. Bea values the older employees at his network of medical facilities in Wisconsin and Illinois. To keep them on the job, he champions a program at his firm called Work to Retire that allows employees over 50 to put in fewer hours, pool jobs or work from home. "I think the mature workers can actually relate to the patients better than our more impatient younger workers," Bea, president of Mercy Health System in Janesville, Wis., said at a U.S. Senate hearing Wednesday.

Nashville's Grand Ole Opry showcases old-time country music every week, but some older country stars complain that they are being shuffled off the stage at the venue's historic radio show. Charlie Louvin, Stonewall Jackson and others say they joined the Opry cast decades ago with an understanding: Faithfully make appearances at the Grand Ole Opry at the peak of your career for less than you could earn elsewhere, and the Opry would offer a place to perform when the hits stopped coming.

A lawsuit by three older Circuit City Stores Inc. employees, alleging that the retailer violated California age discrimination laws by laying them off because they were earning too much, is part of a surge in age bias complaints from disgruntled baby boomers. The lawsuit, filed this week, also reflects employers' contrasting attitudes toward older workers, experts say.

One of the nation's largest law firms has agreed to pay $27.5 million to 32 former partners to settle a ground-breaking age discrimination case, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Friday. The EEOC brought the case against Chicago-based Sidley Austin, which has more than 1,700 lawyers in 16 cities, including Los Angeles, after it downgraded the attorneys' status in 1999 and told them they would have to leave the firm.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that employers could cut benefits for retirees who turned 65 and became eligible for Medicare without violating age discrimination laws. The commission, which enforces workplace fairness laws, said in a regulation that took effect Wednesday that companies and unions could offer greater benefits to those who were too young to qualify for Medicare or state-sponsored health insurance.

A Los Angeles psychologist who was denied a tote bag during a Mother's Day giveaway at an Angel game is suing the baseball team, alleging sex and age discrimination. Michael Cohn's class-action claim in Orange County Superior Court alleges that thousands of males and fans under 18 were "treated unequally" at a "Family Sunday" promotion last May and are entitled to $4,000 each in damages. The targets of the suit are the team and the Corinthian Colleges.

IBM Corp. did not commit age discrimination when it changed its pension coverage in the 1990s, a federal appeals court ruled Monday in an influential case that Big Blue had agreed to settle for as much as $1.4 billion if it had lost the appeal. The case involved 140,000 older employees who were affected when IBM converted to a so-called cash-balance plan, which gives workers virtual accounts that can be cashed out for a lump sum when they leave the company.