Antidiscrimination laws

Federal and state lawmakers should ensure that laws against age discrimination offer safeguards parallel to those afforded other protected classes. They should also ensure the continued strength of these laws. Hiring assessments must measure traits and skills that are important to job performance. A mere correlation between a data point and the relevant job (or other opportunity) does not suffice to establish business necessity. (See also Age Discrimination.) 

Congress should enact legislation to restore the full force and effect of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and other laws affected by the Gross, Kimel, Hazen Paper, and Kentucky Retirement System decisions. 

Congress should pass legislation that provides rights and remedies under the ADEA that are at a minimum on parity with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. It should expand the ADEA’s reach by lowering the jurisdictional threshold to 15 or more and amend section 4(a)(2) of the ADEA to make it indisputable that outside job applicants may challenge hiring policies and practices that adversely affect older individuals. It should also provide the same kinds and amounts of damages under the ADEA as under Title VII. 

State and local laws should ensure that the right to equal opportunity in employment on the basis of age or disability is on par with other civil rights. The rights and remedies provided in state and local laws and ordinances should, at a minimum, be modeled on those found in Title VII. State legislatures should reject proposals to weaken protections from workplace discrimination for any group. State courts should not mechanistically apply the Supreme Court decisions that weaken the ADEA’s protections, ignoring key underlying differences with federal law.