At work we transport developmentally disabled persons. Our vehicle insurance company has given us a Risk Management to follw, when hiring drivers. No one over the age of 65 and they want them to be preferred 23-25. Isn't that the high risk age? Is this age discrimination? Everyone does it, but I wonder what would happen if somebody took a stand. Like a class action suit or something. Just asking.

Ever seen a 66 year old pilot when you fly commercial? Yep, it is age discrimination but in some situations it is needed. I don't want a 75 year old heart surgeon. Your insurance company is not necessarily your friend, they are trying to lower their exposure so their numbers crunchers find when accidents start to increase, apparently for them its 65. This is their recommendation and if you get sued for discrimination they will not be anywhere to be found. Your company will likely be sued eventually and will likely lose the suit.

No one over the age of 65 to drive a vehicle. They are going on statistics concerning accidents involving drivers over the age of 65. They are protecting their assets and wanting to reduce their payouts, in case of an accident. Yes, it is a form of age discrimination, but to challenge this in a court? Not worth it.

There seems to be a big problem with age discrimination these days. Not only with older people, but younger as well. Personally, I am tired of the ''im young'' ''i haven't been around long enough to understand things'' comments. Lol. I may not be in your exact shoes but people on this site seem to think it funny to be rude against the youth of today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tafoote17

Is this age discrimination? Everyone does it, but i wonder what would happen if somebody took a stand. like a class action suit or something. just asking.

---

Hello t:

There is no something other than a lawsuit, although, I guess you could write your congressman - (snicker, snicker).

What would happen if someone filed one of those? They'd go broke in a hurry.

excon

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 says that an employer can refuse to hire/promote, etc on the basis of age if it is a bona fide occupational qualification. This is why pilots cannot continue to fly after a certain age. It is not unreasonable for an employer to say it is a BFOQ to be under the age of 65 to operate a company vehicle, especially since if you are transporting the disabled you are driving large vehicles. As long as the company does not advertise specifically for 23 - 25 year olds, there is no discrimination here. You could try to fight it in court, but would probably lose.

excon agrees: Here's some more rudeness, in the form of a greenie. This is a legal forum. It is NOT a place for you to vent.

Who was venting? Not I. If you got that impression sorry. We come here to voice our opinions and to share our thoughts and give advice. That's what I was doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raynefreak

We come here to voice our opinions and to share our thoughts and give advice.

---

Hello Rayne:

Nope. Not in THIS forum.

excon

PS> By the way, what was the advice you gave to ta??

Askmehelpdesk.com as far as I knew if someone asks something you can answer. I did. Maybe not the exact way you'd like, but sorry I felt like saying something. Other than that, that's all I wanted to say on this subject.

Good luck to you all and keep all your rights in mind, don't let anyone take those away. Ppl fight for them everyday. :-)

Additionally, Raynefreak (and I don't mean to be picking on you) the ADA doesn't have a clause for "reverse discrimination" so, according to the law, if you are under 45, an employer can discriminate based on your age all they want and you have no legal recourse. Some states have laws prohibiting that, but from a federal POV, there's no such thing as age discrimination under the age of 45.

Maybe not in the work force but in everyday life there IS. However, my main statement was to add to the origanal post. I also think younger people are discriminated against. I just wanted to add a statement that's all. No need to still be stuck on what I said, its not a big deal. Ruby I think your wrong merely because thus far on all posts in all topics all everyone ever says is based on opinion. Sometimes backed up by fact. So I disagree with you. And if you disagreed with me why do the opposite and agree? Anyway, it was a simple comment and its really not an issue. I didn't realize that this was a legal topic. I merely saw the age discrimination label and thought id add a comment. Agree or don't, its fine by me. As far as I'm concerned this is old news. Thanks have a great day.

Meg

Hello again, R:

It ain't no biggy, but I guard this board pretty good, even though nobody told me I should. The thing is, when people come to THIS board, what they want if fact, not opinion because they may have several years in the slam on the line.

I know you didn't notice the legal part. You're a smart girl and your input is welcome.

excon

Yes I get you, sorry about that. Just thought it was kind of odd how everyone jumped on me. :-) As for Ruby's comment I completely disagree with it, but have a great day and once again I'm sorry.