A Necessary Tool: The Continuing Debate over the Viability of Disparate Impact Claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

By Marino, Laura C. | St. John's Law Review, Summer 2003 | Go to article overview

A Necessary Tool: The Continuing Debate over the Viability of Disparate Impact Claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act


Marino, Laura C., St. John's Law Review


INTRODUCTION

Discrimination against older employees in the American workplace has long been a common phenomenon.1 Until the 1950s, when many states began to pass laws addressing such discrimination, older workers in America enjoyed relatively few protections from employment discrimination.2 The American population is increasingly getting older. The baby boomer generation workers make up almost half of the entire workforce, and the youngest of them will turn forty in 2006.3 Therefore, in a few short years this entire group will fall within a protected class,4 It is clear that, now more than ever, our court systems and workplaces are on the threshold of a crisis that cannot be avoided unless the current trend of age discrimination is abated.5

Three key pieces of federal legislation offer workers crucial protections against many forms of employment discrimination: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII),6 the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA),7 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).8 Typically, an employee can use one of two theories to allege employment discrimination. First, the employee can claim injury under a disparate treatment theory, meaning that the employer has clearly treated the employee differently based on a protected characteristic.9 Alternatively, an employee can proceed under a disparate impact theory. To succeed under this theory, the employee must show that an employment practice, though neutral on its face, has the effect of discrimination.10 The "chief difference" between these two theories is that under the disparate treatment theory an employee must show that an employer acted with a discriminatory motive, while under disparate impact theory no such showing is required.11 To allege violations of Title VII or the ADA, employees may bring claims using either theory.12 Under the ADEA, while courts unanimously recognize an employee's ability to claim disparate treatment,13 they are split over whether they will allow disparate impact claims. The Courts of Appeals for the Second, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits have allowed such disparate impact claims, while the First, Third, Sixth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits have not.14

The longstanding debate among scholars and the split in the circuits on the availability of disparate impact claims under the ADEA continues today.15 Part I of this Note reviews the background of the ADEA and discusses the split among the circuits on this issue. Part II argues that because Title VII and the ADEA are similar both in statutory language and purpose, courts should allow plaintiffs to use a disparate impact theory to allege discrimination in violation of the ADEA, as they can under Title VII. Part III contends that the Supreme Court has left this issue undecided in Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins16 and argues further that disparate impact theory is necessary for employees who wish to attempt to prove that employment practices based on valid factors are actually pretextual and motivated by animus. Finally, Part IV shows that allowing employees to bring disparate impact claims under the ADEA is in the best interests of the public and fulfills the true purposes of the Act.

I. THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE DEBATE

A. The Purpose and Legislative History of the ADEA

Congress enacted the ADEA in 1967 as a response to the prevalence of age discrimination throughout the American workplace.17 The statute's goal was to end arbitrary discrimination against workers because of their age.18 Congress intended to "promote the employment of older workers based on their ability" rather than their age19 and therefore prohibited an employer from failing or refusing 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."20

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964(21) originally contained a provision concerning age discrimination, but it was deleted before the Act's passage. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Necessary Tool: The Continuing Debate over the Viability of Disparate Impact Claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.