Burden to prove age discrimination

A

AnonFed

New Member
Jurisdiction
D.C.
I have a question regarding possible age discrimination in a federal agency. There is a specific management position with multiple openings in our agency, and openings for this position become available on a semi-regular basis as people leave, are promoted higher, etc. In filling these positions, the current management team has displayed a tendency to select younger candidates, although no one knows exact ages, of course. Working with inter-department dispute management, I discovered as a factual matter that of the 8 openings available in our agency since 2012, all 8 have been filled by candidates under 40. I am in my mid-40's, with nearly 20 years of experience in this agency and outstanding annual performance evaluations, and I have repeatedly been passed over for these promotion positions. Multiple 40+ y.o. co-workers have had the same experience. Based on the pattern of all 8 promotions since 2012 going to younger co-workers under 40 (and with less experience in all cases), how strong of an age discrimination case would we have?
 
I suggest you discuss this with your lawyer or your union.
What you've posted isn't demonstrative of age discrimination.
 
army judge said:
I suggest you discuss this with your lawyer or your union.
What you've posted isn't demonstrative of age discrimination.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply.

My union has encouraged me to file an EEO complaint. I understand that any type of discrimination is difficult to prove, but I would've thought that a pattern of 8 promotions in a row going to under-40 candidates in the past 3 years (with none going to 40+ candidates) suggests pretty strongly a discriminatory pattern, especially where the 40+ cohort has more experience at the job. Why would this evidence not be enough?
 
Not enough information.
Let's say for example what if all of the younger candidates had more education.
Or perhaps the older candidates have more experience on the job, but no managerial training or experience, and perhaps not the right "fit" for a management position.
So although you are seeing a pattern, and you may be right, there could be other factors that you are not aware of.
 
A graduate degree is required in our job series, so our educational level is essentially similar. In many cases, the 40+ candidate has greater experience, as many of them have a significant period of time as an 'acting' director, as do I.
 
You went to your union & they suggested you file an EEOC complaint. Go ahead & file the complaint (if you haven't already) & let them investigate. It's hard to say whether there is age discrimination here or not on what is posted.
 
cbg said:
How do you know what the experience of the other candidates has been?
Click to expand...

I've worked with many of them for 5-10 years, since they started at our agency. The vast majority of our hires are internal, due to the specialization of our work. I've known or known of these people for many years. During my last annual evaluation, in which I again received the highest ratings in all categories, I asked my immediate supervisor, who is not involved in the promotion process, if she could give me one reason I had consistently been overlooked for promotion, other than my age. She admitted she could not.
 
Last edited:
Betty3 said:
You went to your union & they suggested you file an EEOC complaint. Go ahead & file the complaint (if you haven't already) & let them investigate. It's hard to say whether there is age discrimination here or not on what is posted.
Click to expand...

Filing a complaint is my likely course of action, but before I do that, I'd like to get some idea of my odds of success and the strength of my case. I have reason to believe there may be retaliation. Our local EEO rep has admitted these cases are very hard to prove. I'd have thought that a pattern of 8 promotions over 3 years all going to under-40 candidates would be strong evidence of discrimination, but I have no experience in employment law.
 
It is true that age discrimination can be hard to prove. It is hard for us to know if you have a good case for age discrimination since there is no way we can know what factors your employer used to base their decisions on.
 
The lack of explanation from a non-decision maker isn't proof of anything other than her own hesitancy to speculate and assume the motivation of others.

You don't mention how many applicants there have been, who were either over or under 40. Were these the same 40+ year olds who applied for each job? If these same folks have been applying unsuccessfully for years, it would tend to say more about the strength of their candidacy and than their age. Just being over 40 is not dispositive. Who knows how well their interview, how strong their references are or the overall strength of their applications and credentials. Tenure is one of the worst indicators of success in a future position. The skills and abilities for this job do not automatically translate into having the skills and abilities needed for the higher level job. It might even be that it is in the best interest of the organization to keep you where you are if you are really good at your current job.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top