Question

Fifty-five-year-old Merriweather had worked for 14 years as a benefits coordinator before he was laid off by his employer. The employer contended that it eliminated Merriweather’s job for economic reasons. To support its strategic goals, the employer had decided to hire new workers instead of training Merriweather to handle projected additional tasks. The employer chose not to retain an employee who is seven months older than Merriweather as the only full-time benefits coordinator. Two new workers, ages 42 and 50, were hired to divide their time between benefits coordination and the added tasks. Merriweather claimed that he was qualified to handle the added responsibilities, but he did not offer evidence to support this claim. You be the judge. Do the employer’s actions violate the ADEA? Explain.

Answer 1

In my opinion, there was no violation of The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 as in order o prove that the employer violated the stated Act, the employee has to provide the proofs which were not provided by the employee. At the same time, the employer hired the other employees of similar age as the age of the selected candidate was 42 and 50, so there is not a very significant age difference. In order to prove the employer being guilty, Merriweather must support her allegations with proofs and evidence.