Job ageism and labor law disputes in the workplace

The signs at first are disguised, then painfully apparent, they say. Solid performance reviews suddenly turn negative. Invitations to weekly and monthly meetings are no longer forthcoming.

New demands and quotas seem harsh and unreasonable. In what some see as age bias, older workers are being forced out of their jobs. Read the five profiles on these pages to see how some

workers are coping at this stage of their careers. What's the law? Age discrimination claims have been on the rise since 1997, when 15,785 reports were filed, according to the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission. Last year, 21,396 claims were recorded. Not every lawsuit is valid, experts say. Many are settled without assigning blame. Companies are sometimes

hamstrung by the law from giving their side of the story in age discrimination cases. On the other hand, consumer advocates and lawyers say recorded claims represent only a slice of the

total number of workers who get pushed out of a job because they are older. One possible reason for the trend: an aging population. More than 20 percent of workers in the United States, some

33 million, are age 55 and up, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects workers 40 and older from personnel decisions based

solely on age in hiring, firing, layoffs, promotions or demotions. The act applies to employers with at least 20 workers. That law was weakened in 2009, advocates say, when a U.S. Supreme

Court ruling made it more difficult for workers to prove age discrimination. The court ruled that the burden of proof was now on the worker to show that age was the deciding factor — rather

than one of a number of factors, as previously held — in a dismissal, demotion or other adverse action. Bipartisan legislation introduced last year would restore some protections. The

Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, which AARP strongly supports, would amend and clarify federal antidiscrimination laws. Older workers say the legislation is needed. In a

survey of more than 1,502 older adults, about 64 percent say they have seen or experienced age discrimination in the workplace. Of those, 92 percent say it is very or somewhat common,

according to the AARP report "Staying Ahead of the Curve." Grant Morris, a Washington, D.C., employment lawyer, says many companies skirt age-discrimination laws by offering

severance pay to ousted older workers, with the condition that they sign waivers releasing the company from liability. "Everyone faces huge financial pressures when they are discharged

from a company," he says, so workers are quick to accept the terms. Cindy Levering is the volunteer chair of the pension research team at the Society of Actuaries, which conducted a

2013 study that asked recently retired people why they left their jobs. "People who had retired voluntarily — it turned out it wasn't so voluntary," she says. "They felt

they had been pushed out. Some said employers were setting unrealistic goals. Some couldn't do their job because of physical demands, or they didn't feel valued. Not many said they

wanted to retire to pursue their dreams or passion." Even when company practices are challenged, the odds of winning a case aren't great. "It's so difficult to prove age

discrimination that employers are emboldened," says Laurie McCann, a senior attorney with AARP Foundation Litigation. "They think they can get away with it." After losing her

job and not receiving a severance, Theresa Seibert drained her 401(k) account to pay bills. Michael Rubenstein THERESA SEIBERT FORMER EMPLOYER: Quest Diagnostics EMPLOYMENT LENGTH: 26 years

AGE AT TERMINATION: 52 At Quest Diagnostics, one of the largest medical labs in the country, Theresa Seibert's downfall came quickly, she says. Now 57, she'd worked for the New

Jersey-based company for almost half her life. "It places you on a pedestal for knowing your stuff," she says. Then new management changed her sales territory and made it nearly

impossible to make money or to reach new quotas, she says. In 2010, she was fired for poor performance and denied severance for her 26 years of service. HOW SHE COPED: Seibert sued Quest in

U.S. District Court in New Jersey, alleging that her termination was part of a plan to drive out older sales representatives and replace them with younger people who were not required to

meet the same standards. "Quest violated laws by deliberately firing Seibert and about 100 older workers on trumped-up claims of poor performances in order to avoid paying them

severance," says Glen Savits, one of her lawyers from the firm Green, Savits and Lenzo in Morristown, N.J. "The pattern was fairly clear. You have to prove these cases

circumstantially because no one is stupid enough to say, 'I'm firing you because of your age,' " he says. The suit is pending, and Quest has declined to comment.