The article “Out with the Old: the termination of the mixed motive case under the ADEA” is the work of Brian P. Winrow and Kevin Johnson Emporia from the StateUniversity. The goal of the paper is to endow scholars and practitioners with a working knowledge of the United States. In order to understand the subject of age discrimination in the workplace, this article examines filed cases concerning ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act).
The emphasis of the discussion in the article is on the literature and cases regarding recent court holdings that address both incongruent impact and different treatment forms of discrimination under the act. The author covers the subject in different categories starting with the introduction, historical information, essential function and elements of the act, and a description of the forms of discrimination and treatment. In the recent times, there has been a record of an increase in the average work age with the statistics showing a 48% level. This means that the United States workforce comprises the personnel aged 40years. According to the article, the percentage of the aging working force will rise in the next few years to 51%. Most experienced and seasoned employees will demand higher wages from their employer, and this means extra costs to the company (Johnson & Winrow).
In an effort to curb this practice, employers restructure and reorganize the companies so that they give out the posts of high paid employees to one person and in so doing reduce expenditure. Following this practice by most employers in the US, congress passed the law of Age Discrimination in Employment in the year 1967. This act prohibits discrimination of seasoned employees by employers. The act covers all stages of employment from the recruitment level to the promotion and termination decisions by employers. There is a notion that ADEA forbids employers asking about the employees’ age. However, ADEA only protects the employee against any work equities that come with or because of age. The main points the author puts across in the article are:
- Functioning of the ADEA act
- Whom the act protects
- Exceptions to the use of the act
- Circumstances under which an employee will claim employment discrimination
The functioning of the ADEA act was to protect employees who have attained the age of 40 and are seeking employment. There was a growing trend of employers leaving out these workers due to their age and experience for fear of the employees demanding higher wages. In as much as ADEA’s scope far reaching, there are some exceptions to the rule, but this has to come with written evidence. In the event of discrimination of workers on grounds of age, the employee has to raise a claim against the employer. For the claim to be successful, the employee has to provide sufficient evidence of discrimination. The plaintiff must provide evidence of discriminatory actions which fall in the following categories: constructive termination, actual termination, and other forms of adverse employment actions.
The implementation of the ADEA act was a necessary step that the government took to ensure equity at workplaces. The current age for the workforce is 40 years, and, if the government allows for age discrimination at work, then it means that a large population of the US citizens will remain jobless. The article clearly brings out the criteria under which the act came to be and the guidelines each employee and employer need to follow while dealing with the age discrimination issue. The objective of the act is relevant as it protects employees from malevolence of employers in their effort to cut down on personnel costs. Since its implementation, there have been few cases in which an employer has discriminated an employee due to the age.