My supervisor denied me promotion/raise because he prefers training/hiring only younger applicants between their late teens and 20's for a position...he points out that I am older calling me names like "old fart" "damaged good" "unavailable" or that he perceives me as "possibly reaching my 40's, 50's or 60's...a senior citizen"...He did not consider any applicant for a second interview/training/hiring/on-boarding unless the candidate(s) fall under specific criteria including age: younger, in their late teens or 20's, available. To add insult to injury, I, more skilled and experienced, am pressured to train chosen candidates, less skilled and inexperienced, who are offered higher pay with benefits. I am in my early 30's, do I have a case of Age Discrimination based on perceived Age?
Moreover, Age Discrimination intersects with Sex/Gender Discrimination in this case. Younger, female, whose marital status is single/available is considered for the position and treated more favorably with higher pay and benefits than someone like me because of my perceived age and sex/gender roles/assumptions associated with my perceived age. Even with less skill and experience, she is chosen over me, obviously more qualified, skilled and experienced!
Employment / Labor Attorney
Perceived age is not a protected class if your actual age is under forty years old. If you could establish that there is unfair treatment because of gender or or marital status, you might have a claim. Good luck to you.
This answer should not be construed to create any attorney-client relationship. Such a relationship can be formed only through the mutual execution of an attorney-client agreement. The answer given is based on the extremely limited facts provided and the proper course of action might change significantly with the introduction of other facts. All who read this answer should not rely on the answer to govern their conduct. Please seek the advice of competent counsel after disclosing all facts to that attorney. This answer is intended for California residents only. The answering party is only licensed to practice in the State of California.
6 lawyers agree
Administrative Law Lawyer
Your post is troubling in your reference to your assertion that, compared to the person selected, you are "more qualified, skilled and experienced." You should know that the law does not require the employer to pick the most qualified, skilled or experienced candidate. (Exception: public employment where the public entity employer has a stated policy of picking the "best qualified" and has defined the standards and criteria for "best qualified.") The law also does not define the criteria for most qualified. Skill and experience are not necessarily the criteria for that determination.
It is a widely misunderstood fact but employers can lawfully select the worst qualified, a brother-in-law who is functionally illiterate, or make the choice by random. The law only requires that prohibited characteristics such as race, religion, etc not be the basis for the selection.
It is lawful for the employer to require one employee to train another, notwithstanding inequities in their compensation, rank, experience, skill, etc.
You would have a heck of a burden to prove that your employer was making employment decisions on the basis of belief that you are ten - 30 years older than you are. But the issue won't be reached because you are not protected by the laws re age discrimination.
NOTHING SAID HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE! Read this notice BEFORE you contact me! My posts on Avvo in response to the public's questions are never offered as legal advice. Do not rely on any response posted by me as applicable to your specific problem or circumstances. Exchange of information through Avvo's Questions - Answers forum does not establish an attorney-client relationship with me or my law firm. My law firm does not provide free consultations. See http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/free-consultation-the-purposes-and-utility-of-free-for-potential-clients-and-for-attorneys for further details on that issue. Please do not call or email me with a “few questions.” I give advice, make recommendations, and answer specific questions only after reviewing the documentary record and other evidence applicable to a specific client, and only in the course of or following a conference with my client in which all of the relevant information can be identified and developed. AND I give legal advice ONLY in the course of an attorney-client relationship created and defined by a written contract for services, signed by my client and by me or a member of my firm, for which payment has been made. My law firm presently accepts cases involving State and federal licenses and permits; professional (State or federal licensing agency) discipline against State and federal licenses; and disciplinary and academic disputes involving universities, colleges, boarding schools, and private schools. We accept grievances, administrative claims, arbitrations, mediations, negotiations, and other non-litigation matters pertaining to employment, hospital and facility privileges, tenure, and contractual disputes. We conduct seminars and training in employment law for employers and union advocates, and in issues of professional/occupational licensing law for criminal defense attorneys. We accept NO contingency work, and we take no matters for which CCP discovery is applicable.