skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 64213 Find in a Library
Title: AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT - PART 2
Journal: LEGAL POINTS  Issue:99  Dated:(1979)  Pages:COMPLETE ISSUE
Author(s): ANON
Corporate Author: International Assoc of Chiefs of Police
Bureau of Governmental Relations and Legal Counsel
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 4
Sponsoring Agency: International Assoc of Chiefs of Police
Arlington, VA 22201
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THIS ARTICLE ON AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT FOCUSES ON THE BONA FIDE OCCUPATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS (BFCQ) DEFENSE IN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT AND ON THE BONA FIDE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN EXCEPTION.
Abstract: ALTHOUGH THE COURTS HAVE GENERALLY ATTEMPTED TO INTERPRET AND APPLY THE AGE DISCRIMINATION EMPLOYMENT ACT (ADEA) IN A LIBERAL MANNER, CERTAIN STATUTORILY DEFINED EXCEPTIONS SUCH AS THOSE RELATING TO REASONABLE FACTORS AND BONA FIDE OCCUPATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN RECOGNIZED AS BEING AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYER. WHENEVER AN AGE-BASED CLASSIFICATION HAS BEEN CHALLENGED UNDER THE ADEA, AN EMPLOYER MAY SHOW THAT DENIAL OF EMPLOYMENT TO CERTAIN AGE GROUPS IS LEGITIMATE BY PROVIDING THAT THE AGE QUALIFICATION IS REASONABLY NECESSARY TO THE ESSENCE OF THE BUSINESS AND HAS REASONABLE CAUSE I,E., A FACTUAL BASIS FOR BELIEVING THAT SUBSTANTIALLY ALL PERSONS WITHIN THE CLASS WOULD BE UNABLE TO SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY PEFORM THE DUTIES OF THE JOB INVOLVED OR THAT IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO DEAL WITH PERSONS OR AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. COURTS, HOWEVER, HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED FOR AN EMPLOYER TO ESTABLISH THIS FACTUAL BASIS. LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYERS CONCERNS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANIFESTED IN AGE OR SEX REQUIREMENTS, WOULD SEEM TO CONFLICT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ACT. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BURDEN OF PRODUCING SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE, AS WELL AS THAT OF PROOF AT TRIAL, IS ON THE EMPLOYER. FOOTNOTES ARE GIVEN. SEE ALSO NCJ-64213. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--MJW)
Index Term(s): Age discrimination; Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Employment; Equal opportunity employment; Equal Protection; Older Adults (65+); Personnel selection; Police personnel; Sex discrimination
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=64213

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.