<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Welcome to the ManpowerGroup Employment Blawg &#187; Age Discrimination</title>
	<atom:link href="http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/category/age-discrimination/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:42:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Perfect Storm for Age Claims</title>
		<link>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/09/a-perfect-storm-for-age-discrimination-claims/</link>
		<comments>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/09/a-perfect-storm-for-age-discrimination-claims/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:48:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ADEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Age Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[http://i-sight.com/employee-relations/a-perfect-storm-for-age-discrimination-claims/]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/?p=8967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s Part 2 of my interview with the fine folks at the i-Sight Blog on all the latest developments in age discrimination law. Thanks again to Dawn Lomer of i-Sight!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://i-sight.com/employee-relations/a-perfect-storm-for-age-discrimination-claims/">Here&#8217;s</a> Part 2 of my interview with the fine folks at the i-Sight Blog on all the latest developments in age discrimination law.</p>
<p>Thanks again to Dawn Lomer of i-Sight!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/09/a-perfect-storm-for-age-discrimination-claims/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Ugly Truth About Age Discrimination</title>
		<link>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/07/the-ugly-truth-about-age-discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/07/the-ugly-truth-about-age-discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ADEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Age Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[i-Sight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[i-sight blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/?p=8896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A rather intriguing article with the above title appears on today&#8217;s i-Sight Blog, featuring an interview with someone named Mark Toth. Check it out here. The bottom line: Look at the person, not presumptions.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A rather intriguing article with the above title appears on today&#8217;s i-Sight Blog, featuring an interview with someone named Mark Toth.</p>
<p>Check it out <a href="http://i-sight.com/employee-relations/the-ugly-truth-about-age-discrimination/">here</a>.</p>
<p>The bottom line: <em>Look at the person, not presumptions.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2012/02/07/the-ugly-truth-about-age-discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wednesday WOW</title>
		<link>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/09/29/wednesday-wow/</link>
		<comments>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/09/29/wednesday-wow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:01:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Age Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Distracted Driving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Law News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Labor Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paycheck Fairness Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business Jobs Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[happy cows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hillary clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manpower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mark toth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business jobs act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[world of work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/?p=5526</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some interesting snippets from around the wonderful world of work . . . President Signs Small Business Jobs Act: Earlier this week, President Obama signed the Small Business Jobs Act into law. Among other things, the Act allows employees to roll over certain retirement accounts into Roth accounts and relaxes tax rules related to cell [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some interesting snippets from around the wonderful world of work . . .</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">President Signs Small Business Jobs Act</span>: Earlier this week, President Obama signed the Small Business Jobs Act into law. Among other things, the Act allows employees to roll over certain retirement accounts into Roth accounts and relaxes tax rules related to cell phone usage. For more specifics, click <a href="http://www.dcemploymentlawupdate.com/2010/09/articles/employee-benefits/obama-signs-small-jobs-bill-containing-roth-rollover-provisions/#more">here</a>, <a href="http://www.cooley.com/small-business-jobs-act-relaxes-rules-on-employer-provided-cellphones-temporarily-expands-certain-tax-benefits">here</a> and <a href="http://www.jacksonlewis.com/resources.php?NewsID=3398">here</a>.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Social Media and Labor Law</span>. <a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202472588424&amp;Labor_Disputes_Arising_out_of_Social_Media">Here&#8217;s</a> an interesting take on how social networking in the workplace could lead to labor law disputes. And <a href="http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/tools-tips/social-media-policy/">here&#8217;s</a> our sample social media policy for your reading pleasure.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Paycheck Unfairness Act</span>? <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/27/AR2010092705409.html">Here&#8217;s</a> yet another take on the much-debated Paycheck Fairness Act from <em>The Washington Post</em>.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Hillary Clinton Age Discrimination Suit Tossed</span>. A federal judge threw out an <a href="http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/09/age-discrimination-suit-against-hillary-clinton-dismissed.html">age discrimination claim filed against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton</a> on the grounds that the State Department&#8217;s mandatory retirement policy is a &#8220;valid exception to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.&#8221;</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Distracted Drivers</span>. The <a href="http://www.jacksonlewis.com/resources.php?NewsID=3397">Department of Transportation</a> is pushing a series of initiatives to combat &#8220;distracted driving&#8221; by employees in the private sector. Don&#8217;t wait for DOT to act &#8212; implement anti-distracted-driving policies to protect your employees (and the public) now.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">We Have No $$$ But Our Cows Are Happy</span>. Every once in awhile we feature some of the rather strange/dumb laws affecting workplaces around America. Along those lines, <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704760704575515291872456622.html">here&#8217;s</a> an interesting item decrying the fact that California can&#8217;t manage to pass a state budget but has managed to: (1) get a bill all the way to Governor Schwarzenegger&#8217;s desk &#8212; after five committee votes and eight legislative analyses &#8212; that would ban the filming of &#8220;foreign&#8221; cows in New Zealand for the state&#8217;s &#8220;happy cows&#8221; ad campaign; (2) form an official &#8220;Lobster Commission&#8221;; (3) create &#8220;Motorcyle Awareness Month&#8221;; and (4) establish &#8220;Cuss Free Week.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/09/29/wednesday-wow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Big Numbers This Week</title>
		<link>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/04/28/big-numbers-this-week/</link>
		<comments>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/04/28/big-numbers-this-week/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Toth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Age Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Law News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retaliation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[betty dukes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hr news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lafayette college]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mcea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[selden fire district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal-mart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal-mart class action]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/?p=4622</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First, there was the certification of the largest class-action employment lawsuit in U.S. history. Then, a college agreed to pay $1 million to settle a sex harassment lawsuit. Then another employer agreed to pay $263,360 to settle age discrimination claims. Even a union got into the act, settling a retaliation suit for relatively big dollars. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, there was the certification of the largest class-action employment lawsuit in U.S. history. Then, a college agreed to pay $1 million to settle a sex harassment lawsuit. Then another employer agreed to pay $263,360 to settle age discrimination claims. Even a union got into the act, settling a retaliation suit for relatively big dollars.</p>
<p>Here are some of the details . . .</p>
<p><strong>Wal-Mart Makes History</strong></p>
<p>On Monday, a federal court in San Francisco certified the largest class-action employment lawsuit in U.S. history. That means that a case that could involve several hundred thousand plaintiffs demanding billions of dollars in damages may now proceed to trial.</p>
<p>The suit was first filed in 2001 by a greeter named Betty Dukes who worked in Wal-Mart&#8217;s Pittsburg, California store. Dukes and others claim that female employees are paid less and given fewer opportunities than their male counterparts. They also contend that women make up more than 70% of Wal-Mart&#8217;s hourly workforce but less than a third of store management, saying that the company&#8217;s &#8220;strong, centralized structure fosters or facilitates gender stereotyping and discrimination.&#8221; The plaintiffs seek back pay and punitive damages.</p>
<p>Wal-Mart has objected to the size of the suit, calling it &#8220;historic&#8221; in scope and arguing that it would be too difficult to litigate. Judge Susan Graber of the appeals court disagreed, ruling that although &#8220;the size of this class action is large, mere size does not render a case unmanageable.&#8221;</p>
<p>Wal-Mart has indicated that it may appeal the court&#8217;s sharply divided 6-5 decision to the Supreme Court, saying &#8220;We do not believe the claims alleged by the six individuals who brought this suit are representative of the experiences of our female associates.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>College Pays $1 Million</strong></p>
<p>Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania agreed to pay $1 million and furnish significant remedial relief to settle a sex harassment lawsuit filed by the EEOC.</p>
<p>The EEOC alleged that Lafayette&#8217;s supervisor of loss prevention engaged in repeated harassment of five female public safety employees, including groping, forcible kissing, lewd comments, explicit gestures and pornographic e-mails. One employee was forced to quit due to the harassment, according to the EEOC.</p>
<p>&#8220;No one should have to endure the abuse these women faced at work,&#8221; said EEOC Chair Jacqueline Berrien. &#8220;This significant settlement shows that the EEOC will insist on meaningful relief for workers who are victims of harassment.&#8221;</p>
<p>Each of the five plaintiffs will receive $200,000 under the terms of the settlement.</p>
<p><strong>Fire Department Pays $263,360</strong></p>
<p>The Selden Fire District in Long Island, New York agreed to pay a total of $263,360 to 23 firefighters to settle a class-action age discrimination suit brought by the EEOC.</p>
<p>The EEOC alleged that the district refused to let volunteer firefighters over age 55 accrue credit toward a length-of-service award due to their age. As a result, the EEOC contended, older firefighters lost pension amounts after they turned 55 in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.</p>
<p>&#8220;Older workers, like these firefighters, should not be deprived of valuable pension benefits simply because of their age,&#8221; EEOC Chair Berrien said. &#8220;This settlement ensures that these highly valued public servants will finally receive fair compensation.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Union Settles Retaliation Suit</strong></p>
<p>The Maryland Classified Employees Association (MCEA) agreed to pay $80,000 to settle an EEOC retaliation suit. The EEOC charged that MCEA (1) fired an employee for her &#8220;perceived involvement&#8221; in a prior EEOC investigation of MCEA&#8217;s alleged unlawful employment practices and (2) unlawfully denied a promotion to another employee who filed a discrimination charge against the union. The MCEA also agreed to various anti-retaliation remedial efforts in a two-year consent decree.</p>
<p>&#8220;Title VII depends for its enforcement upon the cooperation of employees who are willing to oppose or report employment discrimination,&#8221; said EEOC Acting Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence.</p>
<p>Stay tuned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://manpowerblogs.com/toth/2010/04/28/big-numbers-this-week/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

