|
The federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") makes it unlawful for employers to discharge an individual on the basis of his or her age. The ADEA, however, includes an exception that allows state and local governments to set mandatory retirement ages for firefighters and law enforcement officers. In this regard, 29 U.S.C. § 623(j) provides that a firefighter or law enforcement officer who is over 55 years old may be discharge pursuant to a retirement plan, provided that the retirement plan "is not a subterfuge to evade the purposes" of the ADEA.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently considered whether the forced retirement of a police officer based on budgetary constraints constitutes "subterfuge" in Sadie v. City of Cleveland, No. 12-3142/3143 (June 11, 2013). Sadie involved a City of Cleveland ordinance that provided for the mandatory retirement of firefighters and law enforcement officers at age 65. The ordinance allowed the firefighters/law enforcement officers to petition to continue their employment after age 65 and those petitions were routinely granted. In 2009, however, the City significantly cut the police department budget, forcing 67 officers to be laid off and another 28 officers to be demoted. The Chief of Police also received petitions from several officers, including Joseph Sadie, to continue employment after reaching age 65. The Chief denied the petitions since retirement of these officers would enable him to reinstate some of the laid off and demoted officers. The officers who were forced into retirement filed suit, claiming that the forced retirements for budgetary reasons were a subterfuge for age discrimination which evaded the purpose of the ADEA.
The Sixth Circuit disagreed with the officers and held that the forced retirements for budgetary reasons furthered the City's interest in the efficient operation of the police department. In reaching this conclusion, the Court stated that the ADEA "explicitly allows for the termination of police officers on the basis of age" and cited cases in several other jurisdictions, including the First Circuit (which covers Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island), holding that using age as a basis for requiring retirement is permissible under the firefighter/law enforcement officer exception to the ADEA. As a result, the forced retirements were not a "subterfuge to avoid the purposes" of the ADEA.
While federal law generally prohibits employers from discharging employees on the basis of age, the firefighter/law enforcement officer exception provides municipalities and other local governments with a means to address budgetary issues without running afoul of the ADEA.
.....
The Devine, Millimet & Branch Labor, Employment and Employee Benefits Group offers this free Friday E-Mail Alert service to provide information on recent developments in labor, employment and employee benefits law. If you have any questions about this e-mail, or if you know of anyone else who may be interested in receiving these alerts, please send us an email at employment@devinemillimet.com.
This E-Alert is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to serve as legal advice or legal opinion. Devine, Millimet & Branch, P.A. makes no representations that this is a complete or final description or procedure that would ensure legal compliance and does not intend that the reader should rely on it as such. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Devine Millimet attorney with whom you regularly work.
© Copyright 2013 Devine Millimet & Branch, Professional Association
|
