join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More

Total Articles: 5

Third Circuit Rules "Subgroup" Disparate Impact Claims Are Cognizable Under the ADEA

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently became the first appellate court to find that so-called “subgroup” disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which prohibits age discrimination against individuals age 40 and older.

Eleventh Circuit Overturns Decades of Precedent in Holding that Job Applicants Cannot Claim Disparate Impact Under the ADEA

Sitting en banc, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a ruling that affects whether job applicants may bring disparate impact claims in discrimination lawsuits under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). In Villarreal v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (October 5, 2016), the court concluded that “the whole text of the Act makes clear that an applicant for employment cannot sue an employer for disparate impact because the applicant has no ‘status as an employee.’”

Job Applicants May Not Bring ADEA Disparate-Impact Claims, 11th Circuit Finds

In a first-of-its-kind ruling, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has held in Villarreal v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company that the disparate-impact provision in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) only covers discrimination against employees, not job applicants.

If You Give a Mouse a Cookie: Disparate-Impact Claims Under The ADEA And The RFOA Defense

On April 30, 2012, an EEOC Final Rule took effect regarding disparate-impact claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the defense of "reasonable factors other than age" (RFOA).[1] Ostensibly proposed to address issues related to the Supreme Court's decisions in Smith v. City of Jackson and Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, the Final Rule incorporates the EEOC's interpretation of the RFOA defense, despite the concerns of several commenters.

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Employer-Friendly ADEA Ruling.

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee alleging a disparate treatment claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) must prove that age was the "but for" cause of the challenged adverse employment action. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, ruled that even where the employee has produced evidence that age was one motivating factor in that decision the burden of persuasion does not shift to the employer to show that it would have taken the action without regard to age.
    SORT ARTICLES
  • No Subtopics.