As a general rule, there is an ordinary retirement age that must be met to access a retirement pension. This can be brought forward through early retirement or delayed through delayed retirement, which occurs beyond the retirement age. But can a company force you to retire? Not really, neither in Spain nor in other countries like the United States. Something similar happened to a employee of J&M Industries, Inc., who was fired at age 65 after refusing to retire. Now, the company must pay compensation of $105,000 as part of a settlement reached after being sued for age discrimination. According to the affected person, this situation was “a reminder that age should not define our ability to work”.
Apparently, the lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the United States, the former employee, who worked at the company for almost 20 years, was pressured by one of her superiors to abandon or rather, retire from his job as a purchasing agent. “He asked me several times: ‘Why don’t you retire now?’, as if my age were an impediment to continuing working.“, says the affected person in an interview with Business Insider.
The worker expressed to the company that she did not want nor had any intention of leaving her job, to which she was informed that her position would be eliminated due to apparently a “economic uncertainty”. Still, the EEOC discovered that, just a month after firing her, the company hired a 30-year-old man to fill the same position.
The employee only wanted to work despite being 65 years old
The plaintiff, who prefers to remain anonymous, explains that “It was devastating to see my years of effort ignored. I didn’t ask for anything more than to continue working”. For his part, Rudy Sustaita, regional attorney for the EEOC, highlighted the relevance of the case: “Companies should remember that age discrimination is prohibited. This agreement is a step towards equality in the workplace”.
According to the consent decree signed by J&M Industries, it includes measures such as the payment of $105,000 to the former employee. Among the agreed upon actions are the implementation of mandatory training on employment discrimination, the review of internal policies and the submission of regular reports to the EEOC for three years to monitor compliance with the regulations.
The company defends that the dismissal was not due to age
Although J&M Industries denied that the dismissal was motivated by age, arguing that the replacement “performed broader functions”, the EEOC determined that those questions that his superior repeatedly asked for him to retire and the subsequent hiring of another person for the same position were Clear violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
Finally, the former employee expressed “I hope that my case serves as an example so that no one else has to face this situation. It doesn’t matter how old you are; If you can and want to work, you should be able to do it.” concludes the interview.