Tracking Legal Trends in Age Discrimination in Employment

A: Yes. AI-powered screening and recruiting tools can be used to unintentionally — or intentionally — screen out older job applicants. In the landmark case Mobley v. Workday (2023), plaintiffs alleged that Workday's AI platform automatically rejected older applicants within minutes of submission. In 2022, the EEOC sued iTutorGroup for programming its hiring software to automatically reject female applicants age 55 and older and male applicants age 60 and older. Employers using AI hiring tools should audit them regularly for age bias.

A: No. The EEOC has a regulation stating that job advertisements limiting applicants to new or recent college graduates violate the ADEA because such restrictions disproportionately exclude older workers. In 2024, AARP Foundation filed suit against RTX Corporation for using job postings that restricted applicants to recent graduates or those with less than two years’ experience.

A: While it is not illegal for employers to ask these questions, they can be used as evidence of discrimination. About half of older job seekers report being asked for graduation dates, and many report being asked for their birthdates — information that can be used to screen out older applicants.

A: Older workers face a significantly higher legal burden than workers bringing race or sex discrimination claims. For example, under most anti-discrimination laws, a worker needs to show that discrimination was just one factor in an adverse employment decision. But under the ADEA, following the Supreme Court's 2009 ruling in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, older workers must prove that age was the sole reason for the adverse action — a much harder standard to meet.

A: The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act is proposed federal legislation that would reverse the Supreme Court's 2009 Gross v. FBL decision and restore stronger legal protections for older workers. AARP has long advocated for its passage, which would bring the legal standard for certain age discrimination claims in line with protections available under other anti-discrimination laws.

A: No. The ADEA prohibits employers from forcing workers to retire because of their age. Repeatedly questioning an employee about retirement plans or eliminating a position only to refill it with a younger worker can constitute illegal age discrimination. In EEOC v. J&M Industries (2024), a company was ordered to pay $105,000 in damages after firing an employee near her 65th birthday and replacing her with a man in his 30s.

A: If you believe you have experienced age discrimination, you can file a charge with the EEOC or your state's fair employment agency. AARP Foundation provides free legal resources and, in some cases, direct legal assistance to older adults facing systemic age discrimination. Visit AARP Foundation's website to learn more about your rights and available resources.

A: Leading employers are conducting technology audits of their AI hiring tools, adopting age-inclusive hiring and retention policies, and actively working to upskill older workers. Research shows that multigenerational workforces have higher productivity and lower turnover. Employers who reject age-based stereotypes and embrace workers of all ages gain a significant competitive advantage in today's rapidly evolving labor market.