A former employee is slated to receive $105,000 in back pay and damages following her termination by J&M Industries, Inc., a Louisiana-based manufacturing and distribution company, after she declined to retire at the age of 65. The case, brought forth by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), underscores the violation of federal age-discrimination laws.
Allegations of Age Discrimination
The EEOC filed a discrimination lawsuit against J&M Industries, Inc., alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which safeguards individuals aged 40 and above from age-based discrimination. The lawsuit contends that the company unlawfully terminated the employee for her refusal to retire.
Inquiries into Retirement Plans
According to the lawsuit, a company manager persistently questioned the employee about her retirement intentions as she approached her 65th birthday. The manager’s inquiries included direct queries such as “When are you going to retire?” and “Why don’t you retire at 65?” These actions raised concerns about age-based bias in the workplace.
Disputed Justifications
Upon the employee’s declaration of continued employment, the company asserted that her position as a purchasing agent was being eliminated due to economic uncertainties. However, the EEOC highlighted that the company swiftly hired a man in his 30s to fill the same role, contradicting its claim of role elimination. The company denied age-based discrimination allegations, stating that the replacement had additional responsibilities.
Resolution and Consent Decree
In response to the lawsuit, J&M Industries, Inc. entered a three-year consent decree, agreeing to pay $105,000 in back pay and liquidated damages. Additionally, the company committed to implementing training programs, revising policies, providing regular reports to the EEOC, and posting notices affirming compliance with ADEA regulations.
Public Interest and Relief
Rudy Sustaita, the regional attorney for the EEOC’s Houston District Office, emphasized the significance of the resolution in safeguarding employee rights and combating age discrimination. He affirmed that the agreement not only provides relief to the affected employee but also serves the public interest by deterring future instances of age-based bias in the workplace.
While J&M Industries, Inc. has yet to respond to requests for comment, the resolution of this case stands as a testament to the ongoing efforts to uphold workplace equality and protect employees from discriminatory practices based on age.
