...Act. This paper will examine that case, well as the decisions of the lower courts with respect to this issue of reverse discrimination under the ADEA. It will also examine whether or not other theories of liability recognized under Title VII, such as workplace harassment and disparate impact discrimination, translate into liability for employers under the ADEA.

INTRODUCTION

General Dynamics Land Systems v. Cline involved a group of workers between the ages of 40 and 49, who claimed to be the victims of reverse age discrimination because their employer provides more generous benefits to fellow workers who are 50 and older (Brostoff, 2003). This lawsuit, brought by Dennis Cline and nearly 200 other workers, was filed because a renegotiated labor contract between General Dynamics and the UAW stipulates that full health-care retirements benefits are provided only to retirees with 30 years seniority and who were at least 50 years of age at the time of the new contract (Austin, 2004). Younger employees at the company argued that the contract violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which prohibits workplace discrimination against workers 40 and over. In essence, the plaintiffs alleged that they were the victims of reverse discrimination, a term used to refer to discrimination in favor of members of a class that civil rights legislation was designed to protect. Such cases previously had been brought by Title VII plaintiffs, who were Caucasian, or alternatively male, alleging that they had been discriminated against in favor of racial minorities, or women, respectively (Minkin, 2003).

A federal district court in Toledo, Ohio, dismissed the claim, but a divided three-judge panel of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in July of 2002, that the workers did in fact have a legitimate case. The majority opinion held that if Congress wanted to limit the ADEA to protect only those workers who are relatively older, it clearly had the power and acuity to do so, but it did not (Hofmann, 2003). General Dynamics appealed, and on April 21, 2003, the high court agreed to review the case.

This paper first will examine the ADEA, and its place in federal civil rights legislation. It will compare the application of other judicially developed theories of liability under Title VII, such as the law of harassment being a form of discrimination, as well as the theory of disparate impact discrimination, and their acceptance under interpretations of the ADEA. It then will discuss and analyze the decisions of the lower courts in the General Dynamics case, which involved allegations of reverse discrimination, also a recognized theory of liability under Title VII, and its application to the ADEA. Finally, it will examine the decision ultimately rendered by the United States Supreme Court, its policy ramifications, and potential impact on other areas of law that attempt to bridge theories of liability between Title VII and the ADEA.

THE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967: AN OVERVIEW

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted "to achieve equality of employment opportunities and remove barriers which operated in the past to favor an identifiable group of white employers over other employees." (Griggs v. Duke Power Company, 1971, p. 431). Specifically, Title VII provides that "[I]t shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer--(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin ..." (42 U.S.C. [sections] 2000e-2(a)(1)(2003)). Age was not included among the forbidden criteria under Title VII. Subsequently, the Secretary of Labor investigated the issue of age discrimination, and concluded that it was common for employees to be discriminated against in the workplace because of their age, and inaccurate stereotypes about the abilities of older workers (Recent Case, 2003). The preamble to the ADEA explains that the law was enacted to protect older workers from arbitrary discrimination arising out of invalid stereotypes about the presumed impact of aging on workplace performance (Kilberg, 2003). The stated purpose of the ADEA is "to promote employment of older persons based on their ability rather than age; to prohibit arbitrary age discrimination in employment; and to help employers and workers find ways of meeting problems arising from the impact of age on employment" (29 U.S.C [sections] 621(b)(2003)).

The ADEA prohibits discrimination against individuals over the age of forty because of their age, and also prohibits covered entities from depriving individuals of employment opportunities or taking any other adverse action against such individuals because of their age. Specifically, the ADEA makes it unlawful for a covered employer "(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age; (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's age; or (3) to reduce the wage rate of any employee in order to comply with this chapter" (29 U.S.C. [sections] 623 (a)(1)-(3) (2003)).

HARASSMENT AS A FORM OF DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE ADEA

The ADEA shares the goal of Title VII with respect to the removal of artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary barriers to employment when those barriers operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of criteria, which are irrelevant to job performance. As a consequence, courts tend to follow developments in other areas of civil rights law in interpreting the ADEA as well. For example, harassment can be a form of discrimination under Title VII (Abrams, 1998). The first case to articulate such a proposition involved national origin and racial harassment (Rogers v. EEOC, 1971). However, sexual harassment cases primarily have been responsible for developing and explaining how harassment results in a form of disparate treatment discrimination. The Supreme Court has held that actionable harassment must be sufficiently severe and pervasive so as to alter the conditions of employment and to create an abusive environment judged from the totality of the circumstances from the perspective of a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position (Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 1986). Those circumstances include the frequency and severity of the discriminatory conduct, whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or mere offensive, and whether it...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



More articles from Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues
Letter from the editors., January 01, 2007
Impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley act on accountant liability., January 01, 2007
Property law, personhood and ethics: stem cell research & its impact o..., January 01, 2007
Kelo v. City of New London: is eminent domain for economic development..., January 01, 2007
Federal civil rights legislation and state sovereign immunity., January 01, 2007

Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.