iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Arthur Delaney
GET UPDATES FROM Arthur:

Chuck Grassley, Tom Harkin Strike Back Against Supreme Court On Age Discrimination

Posted: 03/13/2012 3:50 pm Updated: 03/13/2012 4:50 pm

Age Discrimination
Jack Gross testifying before Congress in 2010

WASHINGTON -- A bipartisan Senate bill introduced on Tuesday would restore older workers' rights in the wake of a 2009 Supreme Court decision that made age discrimination claims more difficult to pursue.

The legislation, co-sponsored by Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), would undo the Supreme Court's decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Group. Legal experts said the decision made it harder for older workers than for other protected groups to win discrimination claims because it effectively required workers to provide direct evidence they had suffered discrimination. Before the decision, a worker had to establish only that age was a substantial motivating factor in a discriminatory employment action.

Iowa resident Jack Gross alleged in a 2003 lawsuit that his company, FBL Financial Services, demoted him that year because of his age, then 54. Nearly seven years later, after a jury had awarded him damages, the Supreme Court overturned his case. The Court's 2009 decision has been cited hundreds of times by lower courts in age bias cases.

Democrats have pursued similar legislation since the decision, but Tuesday's announcement represents the first time Grassley has joined them. The AARP and other senior and civil rights advocacy groups have endorsed the measure.

"The decision in the Gross case has had a major impact on employment discrimination litigation across the country," Grassley said in a statement. "It's time we clarify the law to ensure that other people like Jack Gross aren’t put in similar situations. Older Americans have immense value to our society and our economy and they deserve the protections Congress originally intended."

"Jack Gross's story is unique, but sadly, is not uncommon,” Harkin said. "Prior to the Court's decision in Gross, the same standard of proof applied equally to all workers, regardless of the type of invidious discrimination they faced. Ignoring these consistent standards, the Court’s decision established a far higher standard of proof for age than for discrimination based on race, sex, national origin and religion, without any rationale or justification."

Gross told HuffPost last year it troubled him that courts across the country were invoking his name to dismiss age discrimination claims. He repeated that concern in a statement on Tuesday, but said he was happy about the new legislation from his senators.

"I am grateful and proud to have two tenured and highly-respected senators from my home state of Iowa leading the charge on this bipartisan bill to restore longstanding legal standards," Gross said. "Congress has a long history of working together, on a bipartisan basis, to create a level playing field in the workplace, and I hope they will enact this legislation as soon as possible."

The unemployment rate for workers older than 55 is 5.9 percent, lower than the national average of 8.3 percent. But older workers who were unemployed in February were out of work longer than anyone else at an average duration of 52.2 weeks, compared with 36.5 weeks for their younger counterparts.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- A bipartisan Senate bill introduced on Tuesday would restore older workers' rights in the wake of a 2009 Supreme Court decision that made age discrimination claims more difficult to purs...
WASHINGTON -- A bipartisan Senate bill introduced on Tuesday would restore older workers' rights in the wake of a 2009 Supreme Court decision that made age discrimination claims more difficult to purs...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 87
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
04:30 PM on 03/28/2012
What a concept...older workers who were deliberately (and illegally) discriminated against having the right to sue those who gleefully did it to them....seems obvious, right? Only in America, it is absolutely okay to discriminate against certain people provided it benefits the rich or corporate America....bring on the mulit million dollar (billion?) class action lawsuits. Can't wait....
09:58 PM on 03/14/2012
HKR07 watch that filthy sewer of yours or learn to comment.
10:15 AM on 03/14/2012
At least there are TWO people that I can't call "fools on the Hill"....
04:39 AM on 03/14/2012
America, AFTER we get done with this elect year and WE the People keep our current President in office, WE need to contact ANYONE and EVERYONE, under the sun and WE NEED TO FORCE SOME CHANGES in our current SO-CALLED Judicial branch. The current batch, like the GOP, are determined TO DESTROY America with THEIR views and NOT THE VIEWS of the American People.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wisdom67
To each his reach
10:36 PM on 03/13/2012
These are the Justices that the GOP wanted...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
08:49 PM on 03/13/2012
More damage by he Roberts' Court that has to be fixed. Put it on the list, please, and hope Congress gets around to it someday.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
propofemandsyd
Mommy, is that Cheddar or American?
08:39 PM on 03/13/2012
If they weren't over 40, would they even care?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
guy girl
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
08:29 PM on 03/13/2012
I agree that Gross v FBL pretty much pulled the teeth out of any standard of review in age discrimination cases leaving older workers only gums with which to chew the FAcTs. Congress should, at least, put some teeth back into the law in this area lest older workers be left with a whistle, but no bite.
mijjy
Read, Be Aware, Prepare
12:44 AM on 03/14/2012
Nnnniiiiiicccccccccce, fanned!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HKR07
02:15 AM on 03/14/2012
Yes. Next: undo Citizens United.
04:32 PM on 03/28/2012
Now there's a thought....
ALiberalKidd
Before U Fan Know, Liberal ON Poor, Peace, Race
08:08 PM on 03/13/2012
Legal experts said the decision made it harder for older workers than for other protected groups to win discrimination claims because it effectively required workers to provide direct evidence they had suffered discrimination/
===================================
Aliberalkidd: I wonder why this senate affirmative action intervention only on the behalf of older Anglo males, because this same court ruled that women and / or African Americans had to jump through this same high hoop to prove discrimination.
photo
webwzrd
Reality is liberal indoctrination
06:54 PM on 03/13/2012
THis is the worst SCOTUS EVER.
04:33 PM on 03/28/2012
It's up there as the best SCOTUS republican money can buy.....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
moonlightesq
06:28 PM on 03/13/2012
Not only the elderly are discriminated, but many young people are not promoted due to age and inexperience. Some of these age discrimination are no less arbitrary. For example, Article 2, Sec. 2 of our Consitution does not allow anyone younger than 25 yrs of age to run for U.S. House of Representatives. Article 2, Sec. 3, does not alllow anyone younger than 30yrs of age to be a senator. It can be argued that some young people are just as capable to do the job mentioned above than many of the extremely old folks still in Congress today.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CateManhattan
Common sense is way too uncommon.
08:34 PM on 03/13/2012
We've got enough difficult people in congress already. Now you want people who have not lived through much of their lives, for whom civics is textbook material, making major decisions for everyone. Sorry, I teach the age group you are proposing, and a few more years of maturity and experience will do everyone some good. Yes, the job does require life experience. That is why elder discrimination is illogical as well as illegal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HKR07
02:14 AM on 03/14/2012
I get this line: would you feel comfortable with a boss 25 years younger than you?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
propofemandsyd
Mommy, is that Cheddar or American?
08:40 PM on 03/13/2012
I can think of one leader from history who promoted youth over everything: H i t l e r
photo
teapot90
90 yrs since Teapot Dome, GOP corruption unabated
06:14 PM on 03/13/2012
Fighting back against the Supreme Court's bias will continue to be a problem for this country, year after year, as long as we let the Heritage Society determine what kinds of judges we get: right wing ideologues who consistently put corporate profits ahead of human rights and liberties.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnHopwood2
Happiness is a 9 letter word
05:49 PM on 03/13/2012
Its' not like they care about old people its because they spent they're pensions and SS. So they want them to work til they drop!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judy Rauch
05:56 PM on 03/13/2012
Just what I am doing and its a good thing that my place of business does force me out. Just like the War on women and the hatred of old people guess this country will become a country of old middle age white men and they will still whine about something. Look for this Supreme Court to ndo many more things before they drop dead as thats the only way it will change this horrible Supreme Court.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bessielil
trying to organize hummingbirds
05:47 PM on 03/13/2012
Oh, irony. The folks who have a job for LIFE ruled on this issue.

In fact, older workers DO cost companies more, which is why Gross got demoted and others in his company were let go. All of them were over 50. The trouble with efficiency, cost cutting, and budget constrictions is that the human cost is not considered a factor.

I know some people resent 'last hired, first fired' touted by unions. But the above tendency is very tempting to contributing members of the work force who have worked their way up the pay scale or in the ranks. IF a person of any age is let go, it should be for cause.

While I sympathize with the desire to have three teachers in three classrooms by letting go of one older teacher who has never had poor performance reviews, more support for education is the answer, not turning out productive workers.

In business, manufacturing, there are likely many people who should be let go, but it is up to the bosses to make the case based on individual value to the company, not based solely on cost cutting. That's where unions and management should be focused.
06:08 PM on 03/13/2012
I own a business and I am here to tell you that you simply do not understand the situation. Older workers come to work, have both job and company y culture knowledge, and experience that is sorely needed. As to your advice for unions and management this owner will pass.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bessielil
trying to organize hummingbirds
09:04 PM on 03/13/2012
Oh, but I agree with you. I think unions have to give up the last hired first fired mantra, and business has to give up on across the board downsizing by letting go the oldest experienced workers.

What happened in the Gross case was a perfect example, a perfect case, and The Supreme Court avoided or ignored the issue by over turning what was obvious to all involved. I'm not saying you should unionize, and I'm certainly glad you value the work ethic and experience of the older worker. Some companies do not appreciate your commitment to those who have committed their lives to working in one place.
04:35 PM on 03/28/2012
Thank you for recognizing our value...you're rare indeed!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HOMEY1
WE WON YOU LOST
05:42 PM on 03/13/2012
term limits for that teabag court
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
1jdgriff
Logic Prevails
05:57 PM on 03/13/2012
I'll vote for that.
08:23 PM on 03/13/2012
I t-bag liberal s.l.u.t.s
04:36 PM on 03/28/2012
Do you do that after your daddy leaves his house to you each morning when HE goes to work?