The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) makes it illegal for employers to discriminate against employees who are 40 years of age or older, because of their age.  In other words, employers are forbidden from making decisions regarding hiring, promotion, demotion, termination, compensation, job training, or other terms and conditions of employment based on an employee’s age.  Age discrimination is also prohibited under the Illinois Human Right Act, and Cook County and the City of Chicago ordinances.

Remedies available under the ADEA include lost wages, front pay or reinstatement, and attorney’s fees and court costs.  If the employee can prove that the discrimination was willful, the employee will be entitled to double wage and benefit damages.

Age discrimination can be proved through: (a) direct evidence, such as smoking gun statements or documents; and/or through (b) circumstantial evidence, such as evidence that younger, similarly situated employees received more favorable treatment or terms and conditions of employment.

Many employees have a combination of claims, such as an age discrimination claim and a retaliation claim for having complained of age discrimination.  Even if the court finds that the employee was not in fact discriminated against on the basis of age, his/her retaliation claim may survive dismissal, as long as the employee can prove that:  (a) s/he reasonably believed that s/he was discriminated against on the basis of age; (b) s/he complained to her employer or a governmental agency about age discrimination; and (c) the reason that s/he suffered adverse consequences was because s/he complained of age discrimination.

Representative Cases

Our firm has handled numerous cases involving age discrimination.  What follows are a few brief summaries of cases that represent the types of age discrimination cases we have litigated and/or negotiated to a favorable resolution.  Generally, privacy concerns and confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements prohibit us from identifying cases, named parties, and the existence and terms of settlement agreements.

Action filed by a pre-school teacher alleging age discrimination.  After her termination, she learned that the employer had pressured a former manager to scrutinize the oldest teachers and find a reason to justify their termination.  07 C 4145, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois.

The employer terminated our client, the oldest sales representative in the company allegedly because he had low sales, however, younger sales representatives were not terminated even though they made fewer sales.  Shortly before terminating our client, his manager asked whether he ever thought about retiring.

The employer terminated our client with more than 30 years seniority and replaced him with a much younger employee.

The employer placed our client, a high-performing sales representative, on a performance improvement plan the first time his sales fell below plan.  Younger sales representatives who did not meet their sales goals received reduced sales goals and were not placed on a performance improvement plan.

The employer terminated our client, a long-term high performer, and assigned his responsibilities to a recent hire, who was 40 years younger.

If you are concerned about age discrimination, feel free to contact us.