THE NEWS BLOG

 
Steve and Jen bring you this daily review of the news
Premium Advertiser

News Blog Sponsors

News Links

BBC World Service
The Guardian
Independent
Washington Post
Newsday
Iraq Order of Battle
Agonist
NY Times
LA Times
ABC News
CNN
Blogger

 
Blogs We Like

Daily Kos
Atrios
Digby's Blog
Skippy
Operation Yellow Elephant
Iraq Casualty Count
Uggabugga
Media Matters
Talking Points
Defense Tech
Intel Dump
Soldiers for the Truth
Margaret Cho
Juan Cole
Tbogg
Corrente
Gropinator
Just a Bump in the Beltway
Baghdad Burning
Wonkette
Howard Stern
Michael Moore
James Wolcott
Cooking for Engineers
There is No Crisis
Whiskey Bar
Rude Pundit
Driftglass
At-Largely
Crooks and Liars
Amazin' Avenue
DC Media Girl
The Server Logs

 
Blogger Credits

Powered by Blogger

Archives by
Publication Date
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
Comments Credits
Comments by YACCS
Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Sue the whipersnappers


Old folks have rights


Supreme Court eases way for age discrimination suits
But case dismissal shows proving harm may still be difficult

From Bill Mears
CNN Washington
Wednesday, March 30, 2005 Posted: 5:08 PM EST (2208 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a victory for older workers, the Supreme Court concluded Wednesday that people over 40 can sue for alleged age discrimination under a less burdensome legal standard of proof.

The justices ruled 5-3 that older workers can sue in federal court over claims of "disparate impact" -- the loss of wages or benefits enjoyed by younger employees. Previously, older workers had to prove their company had "discriminatory intent," a higher legal standard.

Wednesday's ruling means that companies and employers can be held liable for age discrimination even if their policies were not meant to be discriminatory.

The ruling made clear it might still be difficult to win cases of age discrimination, even under the relaxed standard that will apply to bringing such a suit.

The court agreed that 30 police and public safety officers in Jackson, Mississippi, had the right to bring a case alleging disproportionate harm because younger officers were given proportionately higher wages.

Yet the justices dismissed the lawsuit, saying the older workers failed to prove "harmful" discrimination.

"It is clear from the record that the city's plan was based on reasonable factors other than age," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in the majority opinion. "We hold that the city's decision to grant a larger raise to lower echelon employees for the purpose of bringing salaries in line with that of surrounding police forces was a decision based on a 'reasonable factor other than age,' that responded to the city's legitimate goal of retaining police officers."

Stevens turns 85 next month and is the court's oldest member.

Briefs filed with the court show that about 75 million people -- almost half of the U.S. work force --


Gilly--WOW, looks like Bush's plan to pimp out the ENTIRE judicial branch just ain't working.

This is a MAJOR legal victory--I still bitterly remember the dotcom days, and how so many older working moms got turned away by buttheads who rode scooters to work....


God, I hate those people. Not hated, hate. Still.

posted by Steve @ 6:38:00 PM

6:38:00 PM

The News Blog home page





 

Editorial Staff
RSS-XML Feeds

Add to My AOL

Support The News Blog

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
News Blog Food Blog
Visit the News Blog Food Blog
The News Blog Shops
 
 
 
Operation Yellow Elephant
Enlist, Young Republicans