Woodland Hills Age Discrimination Lawyers

Fighting for Fair Treatment and Justice

As our workforce becomes older and the job market continues to fluctuate and change, many qualified and experienced workers are seeing themselves marginalized in favor of their younger counterparts. Fortunately, there are legal protections for California workers 40 years of age and older when it comes to age discrimination in the workplace. When these protections are breached by employers, victims may seek legal remedies.

If you are at least 40 years old and believe you have been subjected to age discrimination in the workplace, we encourage you to contact our Woodland Hills age discrimination attorneys today. At the Law Office of Payab & Associates, we have more than two decades of legal experience and have recovered millions for wronged workers in California. We are prepared to help you explore your legal options and fight to enforce your rights.

You do not have to accept unlawful ageism in your workplace. Request a case evaluation by calling (818) 918-5522 or contacting us online.

Understanding Workplace Age Discrimination

Employers in many industries used to count on older workers for institutional knowledge and insight that younger workers could not provide. That is not always the case in today's marketplace, and older workers must frequently confront discrimination in the workplace whether they have worked for years at the same company or are just starting a new position.

If your employer has at least five employees, they are subject to California’s Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA). The FEHA prohibits discriminating against an employee or job applicant on the basis of their age if they are at least 40 years old. If you are not sure whether you have a case, our Woodland Hills age discrimination lawyers can answer your questions and explain your legal options.

Illegal age discrimination in the workplace can take many forms, including:

• Refusing to hire a qualified job applicant because of their age. Age discrimination in the hiring process can be a subtle yet insidious issue. Job advertisements that emphasize terms like "young and hungry team" or "fast-paced work environment” may imply an unlawful preference for younger candidates. During interviews, employers who focus excessively on questioning whether a candidate would be comfortable working with younger colleagues or making technological adaptions may inadvertently reveal ageist attitudes. If an employer seems to dismiss a candidate's extensive experience as being overqualified or irrelevant based on the perception of them being too mature for the team dynamics, they may have a bias against older applicants. Furthermore, if an employer outright asks age-related questions, or if there is a noticeable pattern of only younger employees being hired for similar roles despite the qualifications of older applicants, the employer may be engaging in age discrimination.
• Failing to promote an employee because of their age. Refusing to offer promotions to employees on the basis of their age (when 40 or older) is unlawfully discriminatory. This can occur when a seasoned employee is repeatedly passed over for advancement in favor of younger colleagues despite having comparable or superior qualifications and a proven track record of performance. Age-based assumptions that older workers lack ambition, are resistant to change, or cannot handle increased responsibilities not only are unjust but inaccurate.
• Denial of training to older employees. Denying workers who are at least 40 years old access to training and professional development opportunities constitutes another type of illegal age discrimination. This exclusion sends a tacit message that their career growth is not valued, essentially limiting their potential to stay abreast of new industry trends and technologies. When only younger employees are offered training, employers are implicitly suggesting that the investment in developing older workers is not worthwhile due to stereotypes about their ability or willingness to learn. This not only strips older professionals of the chance to enrich their skill sets and advance in their careers but also diminishes the diversity of thought and experience in the workplace.
• Laying off or terminating only particularly older workers. Terminating employment primarily based on an employee's age when they are at least 40 years old is a blatant form of age discrimination that can significantly impact older workers. This practice, sometimes masked as a workforce "restructuring," often targets older employees under the guise of company downsizing or performance-related issues. Such selective dismissal not only disregards the years of dedication and expertise these employees have contributed but also reinforces harmful stereotypes about their productivity and adaptability.
• Refusing to assign older workers particular projects or assignments. Refusing to assign favorable projects, shifts, or assignments to older workers can sometimes be a type of age discrimination. This subtle sidelining prevents older employees from demonstrating their full capabilities, limits their professional visibility, and may hinder their career progression. It creates an unequal playing field where younger colleagues are exclusively given opportunities to shine and grow simply due to age-based bias. Similarly, predominantly giving undesirable tasks or shifts to older workers may be part of an effort to create an unpleasant environment that compels them to resign. This is called constructive termination.