Age Discrimination in the Workplace

Discrimination in the workplace has been present and evident from the beginning of time. Whether it come in the form of harassment based on religion, sex, nationality or unfounded reasons for job termination, various groups of people have faced discrimination in one form or another at some point in time in their working lives. It is for these reasons and many more that today, things such as unions in the workplace exist. The government also recognized a need to lend a helping hand in 1964, when they enacted the Civil Rights Act on July 2, 1964, which is legislation that outlaws major forms of discrimination against racial, ethic, national and religious minorities and women in both school and the workplace (Wikipedia, 2013).
As broad as the coverage that the Civil Rights Act has, it does not cover one important aspect of discrimination still found in many places of employment, age. Many people encounter judgment issues based solely on their age, and that alone can cause problems when it comes to their ability to obtain and/or maintain a job successfully. Employees are working much longer than they have in past years due to the economic downturns that have negatively impacted retirement plans, changes in medical and retirement benefits, and medical developments that have allowed workers to live and work longer and better, with increased mobility (Zachary, 2011). That is where the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967, what was signed into law by President Johnson, bans against discrimination and prohibits discrimination in hiring, promotion, wages, termination of employment, layoffs and the like based solely on age (Wikipedia, 2013). The ADEA is different from the Civil Rights Act because the ADEA applies to employers of twenty or more workers rather than fifteen or more workers, regardless, both protect employees and their rights.
Both the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in the Employment Act are supposed to prohibit workplace discrimination based on detailed aspects that affect the terms, circumstances or rights of employment. Many cases are brought to courts based on violations of people’s rights due to their age in the workplace. The following is a study of the case Larry Edward Dillon vs. West Publishing Corporation; West Group; Thompson Legal Publishing Corporation.
The Plaintiff in this case was Larry Edward Dillon. Larry Dillon was terminated on September 1, 1999 he felt the reason why he was terminated was because of his age. On February 22, 2000, he filed with the Nevada Equal Rights Commission (NERC) with the discrimination charge which was dated May 5, 2000. He also had one complaint filed with the Second Judicial District Court for the State of Nevada in Washoe County. This complaint was filed on August 31, 2001 in State Court of Washoe County just one day short of the two year statute of limitations that Nevada has. There were five actions he had. The actions were: Civil Conspiracy, Tortious Constructive Discharge in Violation of Public Policy, Breach of Contract, Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, but he did not serve the Defendants at this time. After eleven years in the system, and a myriad of appeals and retrials, this case was dismissed due to Plaintiff’s failure to timely serve process under Nevada law (Larry, 2012).
The court that was used in the Case was the Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit is the largest of the thirteen courts of appeals. It is the largest because it deals with the western part of the United States. The Nevada Supreme Court also played a part in the case; they used Scrimer v. Eight Judicial Court to do some referencing in hopes of avoiding any dismissal of the case.
While there are various laws that could have helped the plaintiff in this case, Mr. Dillon, the