August 14, 2006
A.D. FOR NIGHTCLUBS WITH 21-OLDER POLICY?
Boston.com
August 13, 2006
NEWPORT, R.I. --A nightspot's 21-and-over policy has prompted an age discrimination complaint winding through Rhode Island's Human Rights Commission.
The case began in February when Brian Alber Jr., 19, and his parents were kicked out of POP, a nightspot, because the establishment has a 21-and-over policy, according to documents filed with the commission.
Alber's family later filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission, which is expected to hold a meeting on the case this week.
Alber's mother, Robynne, said her son only ordered a hamburger and was humiliated in front of his parents and their friends, she wrote in a letter filed with the commission. After Alber's mother protested, she too was asked to leave.
She declined to comment on the case when contacted by The Providence Sunday Journal.
Dan Puerini, POP's owner, said he won't stop his 21-and-over policy. He said the rule is part of the restaurant's attempt to enforce liquor laws.
"If you are underage, you are going to drink," he said. "It's impossible to keep track of minors in a bar where it's like POP and its jampacked."
At conflict is a state law prohibiting a place of public accommodation, including inns, taverns, barrooms, salons and restaurants, from discriminating against a person because of his age, so long as that person is at least 18.
Human Rights Commission Executive Director Michael Evora wouldn't comment on the case, but he said the commission hasn't previously analyzed 21-and-over policies.
"If you have a restaurant that is open generally to the public but also happens to serve alcohol, you cannot discriminate," he said.
But Evora said he wondered if a tavern could keep out those under the legal drinking age because its primary purpose is to serve alcohol.
August 13, 2006
NEWPORT, R.I. --A nightspot's 21-and-over policy has prompted an age discrimination complaint winding through Rhode Island's Human Rights Commission.
The case began in February when Brian Alber Jr., 19, and his parents were kicked out of POP, a nightspot, because the establishment has a 21-and-over policy, according to documents filed with the commission.
Alber's family later filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission, which is expected to hold a meeting on the case this week.
Alber's mother, Robynne, said her son only ordered a hamburger and was humiliated in front of his parents and their friends, she wrote in a letter filed with the commission. After Alber's mother protested, she too was asked to leave.
She declined to comment on the case when contacted by The Providence Sunday Journal.
Dan Puerini, POP's owner, said he won't stop his 21-and-over policy. He said the rule is part of the restaurant's attempt to enforce liquor laws.
"If you are underage, you are going to drink," he said. "It's impossible to keep track of minors in a bar where it's like POP and its jampacked."
At conflict is a state law prohibiting a place of public accommodation, including inns, taverns, barrooms, salons and restaurants, from discriminating against a person because of his age, so long as that person is at least 18.
Human Rights Commission Executive Director Michael Evora wouldn't comment on the case, but he said the commission hasn't previously analyzed 21-and-over policies.
"If you have a restaurant that is open generally to the public but also happens to serve alcohol, you cannot discriminate," he said.
But Evora said he wondered if a tavern could keep out those under the legal drinking age because its primary purpose is to serve alcohol.
ADVICE FOR THINKING YOUNG
SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE
By MARVIN WALBERG
Dear Mr. Walberg: You often respond to readers who complain of age discrimination in the workplace, and, in particular, the hiring process. Granted, there is no doubt that age bias exists out there, but if I may, I'd like to tell you a true story.
I am 70 and still working full time, 35 to 40 hours per week, and the work that I do is rather physical for any age. Yet three weeks after my 70th birthday, I was offered a job with a competitor! Why? I think because of some of the following:
_ I'm good at what I do, and can document my accomplishments.
_ I have an "old school" work ethic.
_ I am a team player and pull my weight rather than sit back and use my years to my advantage.
_ I stay as young as I can, physically and mentally.
_ I am aware of my grooming and dress, and think of myself as ageless in those respects.
_ I respect the education and skills of my younger co-workers, and I believe that we can learn from each other.
_ I make a concerted effort to stay current with trends and new developments related to my field, and life in general.
_ If a co-worker seems to disrespect my age and maturity, I don't fight back. Instead, I attempt to prove my worth through example.
_ If, on the other hand, a younger co-worker is willing, I believe in mentoring and offering the wisdom that comes from years of exposure.
_ When I'm off, I like to walk, read, listen to music and, if you promise not to tell, nap as much as I can!
I don't disagree. There is a major problem with age discrimination in our workplace, and I don't doubt that it plays a big part in the hiring process. I also believe that if a person truly believes in his or her abilities and is prepared to demonstrate accomplishments, discrimination can sometimes be overcome. You simply have to believe in yourself and make the effort to sell your accomplishments. I applaud your efforts to communicate your beliefs and sincerely hope that my true story will help you in your efforts.
_ An e-mail from "Anon" in Alabama
Dear Anon: Fortunately you didn't ask a question, because my only response to your letter could be, "Thank you!" Think young, be young!
(Marvin Walberg is a job search consultant based in Birmingham, Ala. He can be contacted at P.O. Box 43056, Birmingham, AL, 35243. E-mail him at mwalberg(at)bellsouth.net.)
Published: Wednesday, 09 August 2006
Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service
By MARVIN WALBERG
Dear Mr. Walberg: You often respond to readers who complain of age discrimination in the workplace, and, in particular, the hiring process. Granted, there is no doubt that age bias exists out there, but if I may, I'd like to tell you a true story.
I am 70 and still working full time, 35 to 40 hours per week, and the work that I do is rather physical for any age. Yet three weeks after my 70th birthday, I was offered a job with a competitor! Why? I think because of some of the following:
_ I'm good at what I do, and can document my accomplishments.
_ I have an "old school" work ethic.
_ I am a team player and pull my weight rather than sit back and use my years to my advantage.
_ I stay as young as I can, physically and mentally.
_ I am aware of my grooming and dress, and think of myself as ageless in those respects.
_ I respect the education and skills of my younger co-workers, and I believe that we can learn from each other.
_ I make a concerted effort to stay current with trends and new developments related to my field, and life in general.
_ If a co-worker seems to disrespect my age and maturity, I don't fight back. Instead, I attempt to prove my worth through example.
_ If, on the other hand, a younger co-worker is willing, I believe in mentoring and offering the wisdom that comes from years of exposure.
_ When I'm off, I like to walk, read, listen to music and, if you promise not to tell, nap as much as I can!
I don't disagree. There is a major problem with age discrimination in our workplace, and I don't doubt that it plays a big part in the hiring process. I also believe that if a person truly believes in his or her abilities and is prepared to demonstrate accomplishments, discrimination can sometimes be overcome. You simply have to believe in yourself and make the effort to sell your accomplishments. I applaud your efforts to communicate your beliefs and sincerely hope that my true story will help you in your efforts.
_ An e-mail from "Anon" in Alabama
Dear Anon: Fortunately you didn't ask a question, because my only response to your letter could be, "Thank you!" Think young, be young!
(Marvin Walberg is a job search consultant based in Birmingham, Ala. He can be contacted at P.O. Box 43056, Birmingham, AL, 35243. E-mail him at mwalberg(at)bellsouth.net.)
Published: Wednesday, 09 August 2006
Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service
IBM CLEARED IN A.D. CASE
By Caroline McCarthy, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: August 7, 2006, 3:26 PM PT
A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of IBM in an age discrimination suit concerning a change in pension plans that the plaintiffs said favored younger workers.
The case, Cooper vs. IBM, was filed on behalf of 140,000 older IBM employees in the wake of Big Blue's 1999 decision to switch its pension coverage to a "cash-balance" plan. In the new plan, all IBM employees receive the same pay credit (5 percent) and interest credit each year regardless of age. The change to a cash-balance system has proven controversial among older workers--as well as shareholders--because a dollar earned by a younger worker has more time to accrue in value. In more traditional pension plans, the value of benefits increases at a faster rate for older workers.
A federal judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, led by now-retired IBM employee Kathi Cooper, in 2003. IBM simultaneously negotiated a settlement and filed an appeal with the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The American Benefits Council, a nonprofit organization that supports privately sponsored pension plans and had filed an amicus brief on behalf of IBM in late 2005--cosigned by such corporations as Honeywell, AT&T and Wells Fargo--applauded the court's decision. Council President James A. Klein said the verdict "should settle this matter once and for all," adding that "cash balance and other hybrid plans are--and always have been--perfectly legal and not age discriminatory."
Klein cited the apparent success of the Pension Protection Act, a bill that recently passed the Senate and which he says "clearly affirms the legitimacy of hybrid pension plan designs."
Now that its settlement is void, pension plan controversies may be over for the Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM. Earlier this year, the company froze its pension fund and announced a transition to 401(K) plans. "We are gratified that the Court of Appeals has vindicated IBM's long-held position that its pension plan formula is both lawful and age-neutral," the company wrote in a statement. "Treating the time value of money as a form of discrimination is not sensible."
Cooper, however, claims that the case still has momentum and has no plans to give it up.
The plaintiff's counsel was unavailable for comment.
Published on ZDNet News: August 7, 2006, 3:26 PM PT
A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of IBM in an age discrimination suit concerning a change in pension plans that the plaintiffs said favored younger workers.
The case, Cooper vs. IBM, was filed on behalf of 140,000 older IBM employees in the wake of Big Blue's 1999 decision to switch its pension coverage to a "cash-balance" plan. In the new plan, all IBM employees receive the same pay credit (5 percent) and interest credit each year regardless of age. The change to a cash-balance system has proven controversial among older workers--as well as shareholders--because a dollar earned by a younger worker has more time to accrue in value. In more traditional pension plans, the value of benefits increases at a faster rate for older workers.
A federal judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, led by now-retired IBM employee Kathi Cooper, in 2003. IBM simultaneously negotiated a settlement and filed an appeal with the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The American Benefits Council, a nonprofit organization that supports privately sponsored pension plans and had filed an amicus brief on behalf of IBM in late 2005--cosigned by such corporations as Honeywell, AT&T and Wells Fargo--applauded the court's decision. Council President James A. Klein said the verdict "should settle this matter once and for all," adding that "cash balance and other hybrid plans are--and always have been--perfectly legal and not age discriminatory."
Klein cited the apparent success of the Pension Protection Act, a bill that recently passed the Senate and which he says "clearly affirms the legitimacy of hybrid pension plan designs."
Now that its settlement is void, pension plan controversies may be over for the Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM. Earlier this year, the company froze its pension fund and announced a transition to 401(K) plans. "We are gratified that the Court of Appeals has vindicated IBM's long-held position that its pension plan formula is both lawful and age-neutral," the company wrote in a statement. "Treating the time value of money as a form of discrimination is not sensible."
Cooper, however, claims that the case still has momentum and has no plans to give it up.
The plaintiff's counsel was unavailable for comment.
FERTILIZER COMPANY ACCUSED OF A.D.
Oregon Public Broadcasting
August 4, 2005
By Krisitan Foden-Vencil
PORTLAND, OR (2006-08-04) The federal government is suing Woodburn Fertilizer -- alleging age discrimination. As Kristian Foden-Vencil reports, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says such cases now make up 20% of its caseload.
-----------
55-year-old Carolyn Arzino worked at Woodburn Fertilizer for 10 years before the president's stepdaughter, who was in her 20s, was promoted to the position of office manager.
Joan Ehrlich, the regional director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claims the new manager made Arzino's life a misery.
Joan Ehrlich: "In one case the supervisor said: 'Turn up your Miracle Ear.' Well, she wasn't hard of hearing but she didn't understand something that was being said to her. Or: 'Why don't you try ginkgo bilboa, it'll give you more energy,' or 'Look at me as a role model, I'm young and vibrant.'"
The lawsuit is seeking back wages and compensatory damages for the humiliation Arzino says she suffered. Ehrlich says her agency also wants to send the message that age discrimination will not be tolerated.
A spokeswoman for Woodburn Fertilizer declined to comment on the lawsuit.
August 4, 2005
By Krisitan Foden-Vencil
PORTLAND, OR (2006-08-04) The federal government is suing Woodburn Fertilizer -- alleging age discrimination. As Kristian Foden-Vencil reports, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says such cases now make up 20% of its caseload.
-----------
55-year-old Carolyn Arzino worked at Woodburn Fertilizer for 10 years before the president's stepdaughter, who was in her 20s, was promoted to the position of office manager.
Joan Ehrlich, the regional director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claims the new manager made Arzino's life a misery.
Joan Ehrlich: "In one case the supervisor said: 'Turn up your Miracle Ear.' Well, she wasn't hard of hearing but she didn't understand something that was being said to her. Or: 'Why don't you try ginkgo bilboa, it'll give you more energy,' or 'Look at me as a role model, I'm young and vibrant.'"
The lawsuit is seeking back wages and compensatory damages for the humiliation Arzino says she suffered. Ehrlich says her agency also wants to send the message that age discrimination will not be tolerated.
A spokeswoman for Woodburn Fertilizer declined to comment on the lawsuit.
August 03, 2006
ANOTHER FRIEND FACES UNEMPLOYMENT
I learned yesterday that one of my colleagues was "let go" of her senior position in a Fortune 500 corporation. The entire PR department has now been outsourced and she finds herself without a job and in her early 50s.
Needless to say, she is in shock, anxious and worried. Her six-figure salary, bennies and prestigious corporate office are gone. She knows how challenging it will be to find work (her husband has a great job, so relocation is near impossible) and the Mid-Western city we share has fewer and fewer senior communications positions even left in the region. Corporate consolidations, headquarter migration and businesses just plain closing have contributed to far fewer opportunities.
I asked her what she planned to do next. She paused and said she just was not sure what the next step would be. She has some "feelers" out there, but generally speaking, we know 90% of the senior communications jobs that are out there in town. And right now, there is not much.
With two kids in college, my friend is facing some serious lifestyle changes -- which can be very hard on the ego and the family. The American Dream gets reigned in hard and it can be very tough on marital relationships, happiness with the kids and keeping up with successful (and less limited) friends who can still take cruises, buy nicer automobiles and hire yard/housekeeping services to have more leisure hours.
Life changes are always something that happens to somebody else. I now have almost a half-a-dozen friends in this career quagmire. All good workers. Intelligent. Easy going, non-combative employees. Stable. Sober. Witty. Attractive. Experienced. Educated. What is the common denominator in why their careers have turned upside down?
They all are over fifty.
Needless to say, she is in shock, anxious and worried. Her six-figure salary, bennies and prestigious corporate office are gone. She knows how challenging it will be to find work (her husband has a great job, so relocation is near impossible) and the Mid-Western city we share has fewer and fewer senior communications positions even left in the region. Corporate consolidations, headquarter migration and businesses just plain closing have contributed to far fewer opportunities.
I asked her what she planned to do next. She paused and said she just was not sure what the next step would be. She has some "feelers" out there, but generally speaking, we know 90% of the senior communications jobs that are out there in town. And right now, there is not much.
With two kids in college, my friend is facing some serious lifestyle changes -- which can be very hard on the ego and the family. The American Dream gets reigned in hard and it can be very tough on marital relationships, happiness with the kids and keeping up with successful (and less limited) friends who can still take cruises, buy nicer automobiles and hire yard/housekeeping services to have more leisure hours.
Life changes are always something that happens to somebody else. I now have almost a half-a-dozen friends in this career quagmire. All good workers. Intelligent. Easy going, non-combative employees. Stable. Sober. Witty. Attractive. Experienced. Educated. What is the common denominator in why their careers have turned upside down?
They all are over fifty.
August 01, 2006
$5.5 MILLION SPRINT SETTLEMENT
Kansas City Business Journal - July 28, 2006
A federal judge in Atlanta has approved Sprint Nextel Corp.'s $5.5 million settlement with plaintiffs in an age discrimination suit.
The settlement approved Thursday by U.S. District Judge Beverly Martin covers 462 former Sprint Corp. employees who alleged that the telecommunications giant had laid them off in favor of younger workers. Sprint Nextel (NYSE: S) agreed to the deal without an admission of guilt.
"The reason we settled was simply to get back to the business at hand, which is serving customers," Sprint Nextel spokesman David Gunasegaram said.
A similar case, involving 1,725 former Sprint employees, is pending in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan.
Dennis Egan, a lawyer at The Popham Law Firm PC, who represents the workers, said Friday that the Atlanta settlement shouldn't affect his case.
"We've got quite a bit more in dollars lost," he said.
The local case was scheduled to go to trial in January 2007, but Egan said it has been delayed to allow more time for discovery. More than 400 depositions have been taken so far, including one from former Sprint CEO Bill Esrey.
Egan said he would be open to a settlement for the right amount, but he declined to name a figure.
"We have had settlement discussions," he said. "That's about all I can say."
Gunasegaram declined to comment on the local case.
A federal judge in Atlanta has approved Sprint Nextel Corp.'s $5.5 million settlement with plaintiffs in an age discrimination suit.
The settlement approved Thursday by U.S. District Judge Beverly Martin covers 462 former Sprint Corp. employees who alleged that the telecommunications giant had laid them off in favor of younger workers. Sprint Nextel (NYSE: S) agreed to the deal without an admission of guilt.
"The reason we settled was simply to get back to the business at hand, which is serving customers," Sprint Nextel spokesman David Gunasegaram said.
A similar case, involving 1,725 former Sprint employees, is pending in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan.
Dennis Egan, a lawyer at The Popham Law Firm PC, who represents the workers, said Friday that the Atlanta settlement shouldn't affect his case.
"We've got quite a bit more in dollars lost," he said.
The local case was scheduled to go to trial in January 2007, but Egan said it has been delayed to allow more time for discovery. More than 400 depositions have been taken so far, including one from former Sprint CEO Bill Esrey.
Egan said he would be open to a settlement for the right amount, but he declined to name a figure.
"We have had settlement discussions," he said. "That's about all I can say."
Gunasegaram declined to comment on the local case.
