The Legislature hereby declares its rejection of the court of appeal opinion in Marks v. Loral Corp. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 30, and states that the opinion does not affect existing law in any way, including, but not limited to, the law pertaining to disparate treatment. The Legislature declares its intent that the use of salary as the basis for differentiating between employees when terminating employment may be found to constitute age discrimination if use of that criterion adversely impacts older workers as a group, and further declares its intent that the disparate impact theory of proof may be used in claims of age discrimination. The Legislature further reaffirms and declares its intent that the courts interpret the state's statutes prohibiting age discrimination in employment broadly and vigorously, in a manner comparable to prohibitions against sex and race discrimination, and with the goal of not only protecting older workers as individuals, but also of protecting older workers as a group, since they face unique obstacles in the later phases of their careers. Nothing in this section shall limit the affirmative defenses traditionally available in employment discrimination cases including, but not limited to, those set forth in Section 7286.7 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations. - See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/government-code/gov-sect-12941.html#sthash.oHSymLaO.dpuf
4 replies (most recent on top)
This is #GOLD
In CA, code 12941 states :the use of salary as the basis when terminating employment may be found to constitute age discrimination
The Legislature hereby declares its rejection of the court of appeal opinion in Marks v. Loral Corp. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 30, and states that the opinion does not affect existing law in any way, including, but not limited to, the law pertaining to disparate treatment. The Legislature declares its intent that the use of salary as the basis for differentiating between employees when terminating employment may be found to constitute age discrimination if use of that criterion adversely impacts older workers as a group, and further declares its intent that the disparate impact theory of proof may be used in claims of age discrimination. The Legislature further reaffirms and declares its intent that the courts interpret the state's statutes prohibiting age discrimination in employment broadly and vigorously, in a manner comparable to prohibitions against sex and race discrimination, and with the goal of not only protecting older workers as individuals, but also of protecting older workers as a group, since they face unique obstacles in the later phases of their careers. Nothing in this section shall limit the affirmative defenses traditionally available in employment discrimination cases including, but not limited to, those set forth in Section 7286.7 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations. - See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/government-code/gov-sect-12941.html#sthash.oHSymLaO.dpuf
The numbers will prove this is exactly what they have been and are doing. Expect a class action lawsuit...
Good lucking proving you were fired for high pay. The company would never admit that. If you were fired be thankful, collect some unemployment and find a new job. Be thankful that this dying company did you a favor and let you go
so, if we were selected for termination or harassed until we quit because they viewed our pay rates as being to high. we can file an age discrimination suit?