Smith v. City of Jackson

No. 03-1160 (U.S. Sup. Ct. Mar. 30, 2005) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55841

Description

Age Discrimination in Employment Act Authorizes Recovery in Disparate-Impact Cases Comparable to Griggs

Abstract

The Supreme Court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) authorizes recovery in disparate-impact cases comparable to Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971). Respondent city, in revising its employee pay plan, granted raises to all police officers and police dispatchers in an attempt to bring their starting salaries up to the regional average. Officers with less than five years’ service received proportionately greater raises than those with more seniority, and most officers over the age of 40 had more than five years of service. Petitioners, a group of older officers, filed suit under the ADEA claiming that they were adversely affected by respondent’s pay plan because of their age. The district court granted respondent’s motion for summary judgment. Affirming, the Fifth Circuit held that disparate-impact claims are categorically unavailable under the ADEA, but it assumed that the facts alleged by petitioners would entitled them to relief under Griggs, which announced a disparate-impact theory of recovery for cases brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Affirming, the Court found that petitioners had not set forth a valid disparate-impact claim. Finding that the ADEA authorizes recovery in disparate-impact cases comparable to Griggs, the Court noted that, except for the substitution of “age” for “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,” the language of the section 4(a)(2) of the ADEA and section 703(a)(2) or Title VII is identical. Unlike Title VII, however, the ADEA significantly narrows its coverage by permitting any “otherwise prohibited” action “where the differentiation is based on reasonable factors other than age.” The Court found that, where petitioners have done little more than point out that the pay plan is relatively less generous to older workers than to younger ones, they have not identified any specific test, requirement, or practice within the pay plan that has an adverse impact on older workers. Further, the Court noted that that the city’s plan was based on reasonable factors other than age.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2005-01-01 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: