PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Federal Age Discrimination Act”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1982

Nondiscrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance from HHS. Final rules.

These final regulations implement provisions of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and the general, governmentwide regulation published in the Federal Register on June 12, 1979, codified at 45 CFR Part 90. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. The Act also contains certain exceptions that permit, under limited circumstances, use of age distinctions or factors other than age that may have a disproportionate effect on the basis of age. The Act applies to persons of all ages. These final regulations are designed to guide the actions of recipients of financial assistance from HHS. The regulations incorporate the basic standards for determining what is age discrimination that were set forth in the general regulations. They discuss the responsibilities of HHS recipients and the investigations, conciliation and enforcement procedures HHS will use to ensure compliance with the Act.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1983

Age discrimination in retirement: in search of an alternative.

American employers have traditionally relied on age as the criterion for mandatory retirement. Yet advances in medicine indicate the inadequacy of age as a measure of job competence and suggest the potential for a more reliable measure. With current social and economic conditions pressing many employees to seek to work beyond mandatory retirement ages set by their employers, transition to more reliable measures has become a vital matter. This Note explores the potential for implementing medically-based alternatives to the age proxy. It initially addresses problems of medical feasibility and economic practicality, and considers how the divergent interests of employees and employers can be accommodated. The balance of the Note examines the present roles of Congress, agencies, and courts in facilitating age-blind mandatory retirement policy. It suggests the need for reform of the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act and recommends a more effective distribution of roles among governmental institutions.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1988

The age discrimination in employment act: a review of court decisions.

Over 600 federal court cases filed between 1970 and 1986 were reviewed in an attempt to discover the major themes and issues. Over all personnel decisions the employer was consistently favored (65%). Performance evidence was central to all cases reviewed. Subjective appraisals were often presented by management and were not considered suspect by the courts. Evidence of management's concern over the age of the workforce (e.g., economic costs and stereotypic beliefs) was also probative. Statistical evidence was presented in a majority of cases. However, inaccurate data and inappropriate comparisons negated its value. Most cases involved a termination or reduction in workforce decision (54%), but the most controversial area involved BFOQ's. A three-part sequential inquiry was proposed that would attempt to clear up these issues. Recent legal refinements may ease the plaintiff's burden in establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. Current techniques from the fields of industrial gerontology and industrial psychology may help clarify inconsistencies in court decisions.

Aged↗
PubMed1988

Public Law 100-259, 22 March 1988.

This US Act does the following with respect to sex and age discrimination and abortion funding: amends Title IX (Prohibition of Sex Discrimination) of the Education Amendments of 1972 to define the phrase "program or activity" and the term "program" to mean all of the operations of the following entities, any part of which is extended Federal financial assistance: 1) a department, agency, special purpose district, or other instrumentality of a State or local government; 2) a State or local government entity which distributes such assistance and the agency or department to which such assistance is extended; 3) a college, university, or other postsecondary institution, or public system of higher education; 4) a local educational agency, system of vocational education, or other school system; and 5) a corporation, partnership, or other private organization or certain sole proprietorships. The Act also states that such terms do not include any operation of an entity which is controlled by a religious organization and that nothing in such Act shall be construed to: 1) require or prohibit any person or entity to provide or pay for an abortion or 2) permit a penalty to be imposed on any person because such person is seeking or has received any benefit or service related to a legal abortion. The Act also amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to define the phrase "program or activity" to mean all of the activities of the aforementioned entities. The Act further states that this Act does not require any individual or hospital or other institution, program, or activity that receives Federal financial assistance to perform or pay for an abortion.

Abortion, Induced↗
PubMed1981

Employment discrimination: procedures for handling complaints--Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Proposed rule.

This proposed rule sets forth procedures for the handling of complaints of employment discrimination which are filed with Federal fund granting agencies under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and other provisions of Federal law which prohibit discrimination on grounds of race, color, religion, age, sex or national origin in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance. The regulations allow the fund granting agency to refer complaints to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). For complaints covered both by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, or other statutes within EEOC's jurisdiction and by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act or Title IX, the regulations contemplate that most complaints of individual acts of discrimination will be referred to EEOC for investigation and conciliation, while most complaints of systemic discrimination will be retained by the fund granting agency. Employment discrimination complaints which are not covered by Title VI or Title IX will be transferred to EEOC. This proposed rule is not a "major rule" as defined by Section 1(b) of Executive Order 12291.

Civil Rights↗
PubMed1986

Discriminatory aspects of medical screening.

Presently, there are few legal restrictions on the use of medical screening of workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) requires that certain medical tests be performed when workers will be exposed to specific toxic substances. The OSH Act does not, however, prohibit the use of any medical screening measure nor does it indicate what actions an employer may or may not take as a result of such information. (A notable exception is the medical removal provision of the Lead Standard). This paper discusses that protection afforded under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This paper will demonstrate that the law has, in general, failed to take into account the discriminatory aspects of medical screening.

Civil Rights↗
PubMed1994

Evaluation of aging pilots: evidence, policy, and future directions.

Current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations require that pilots of large commercial passenger and cargo aircraft be under age 60. However, the requirement does not apply to other pilots and the courts have ruled that mandatory retirement of test pilots at age 60 violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. FAA medical standards establish three levels of medical qualification, which require certain age-specific screening tests. This paper reviews the epidemiologic and clinical evidence relevant to the evaluation of aging pilots. This evidence is compared and contrasted with the current FAA requirements and past recommendations of the American Medical Association, the Institute of Medicine, and the Office of Technology Assessment. An opportunity exists to assess the class I examination and other tests through the consent decree covering aging test pilots. Another course of action would be to implement special issuances for older pilots.

Accidents, Aviation↗
PubMed2000

The white world of nursing homes: the myriad barriers to access facing today's elderly minorities.

In this note, Ms. Aeschleman explores the cultural, social, and economic barriers faced by elderly minorities in need of nursing home care. Ms. Aeschleman argues that minority elders face greater economic barriers to nursing home access than Whites because of factors such as lower average incomes and a lack of access to and assistance with government programs. Culturally, Ms. Aeschleman argues that minorities face barriers to nursing home care because of language differences, the location of nursing homes within communities, traditions, and both overt and indirect acts of discrimination from nursing home staff, administrators, and White clients. Following a discussion of these barriers, Ms. Aeschleman suggests options to give elderly minorities equal access to nursing homes through federal and state incentives, as well as community-based activism and awareness campaigns.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Workplace privacy: HIV testing, disclosure, and discrimination.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing and the disclosure of HIV-related information pose questions of privacy and public policy that are of concern in both public- and private-sector workplaces. Public-sector employees have constitutional protection from discrimination on the basis of their HIV-positive status. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is an important source of protection for private-sector employees. There are also other federal laws that provide protection from discrimination. However, the scope of these laws is unclear. Similarly, while some state legislatures have attempted to set standards to protect the privacy of HIV-positive employees, laws vary from state to state. Case precedent is also inconsistent. This article examines some current issues regarding HIV testing, employee privacy, and protection from discrimination.

AIDS Serodiagnosis↗
PubMed1980

Child health in the workplace: the Supreme Court in Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918).

Exploitation of children in the labor force at the beginning of this century gave rise to a national campaign leading to congressional passage of the Keating-Owen Act in 1916. The act prohibited from interstate commerce goods produced in factories or mines that employed children who either were under fourteen years of age or who were under sixteen years of age and worked more than eight hours a day. Despite its popular support, the Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918). The Court's decision involved several major issues: interpretation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, freedom of contract, police power of the states, and the interstate commerce clause. Review of previous Court decisions suggests that the justices were on less than solid legal ground in reaching their decision. Examination of the historical context of the decision, however, suggests other factors that may have played a more important role than judicial precedents. The debate prompted by Hammer v. Dagenhart has much relevance to such current issues as young agricultural workers, sex discrimination in industry, and the powers of the federal government vis-a-vis states and individual citizens.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1989

Medical treatment for older people and people with disabilities: 1988 developments. National Legal Center.

In 1988, the United States Supreme Court determined that "primary alcoholism" is "willful misconduct" that disqualifies veterans for an extension of time for educational benefits eligibility based on disability. The Civil Rights Restoration Act, passed in 1988, broadened the scope of programs or activities which may be covered by federal civil rights statutes that prohibit discrimination by entities receiving federal financial assistance. Decisions by the highest courts in two states may signal a trend toward reestablishing protection for persons with disabilities who are incompetent and are being threatened with denial of life-sustaining food and fluids. Federal and state courts addressed the issue of withholding medical treatment from persons with disabilities. The rights of persons with AIDS to participate in programs receiving federal financial assistance continue to be litigated with increasing frequency. Lastly, thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have "living will" legislation.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed1991

Medical treatment for older persons and persons with disabilities: 1990 developments. National Legal Center Staff.

The United States Supreme Court reviewed cases involving eligibility standards for children with disabilities to receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits and a guardian's authority to withhold nutrition and hydration from a permanently disabled incompetent adult. The Americans with Disabilities Act, a major piece of civil rights legislation for persons with disabilities, promises to prohibit discrimination in all areas, including health services. Parents of infants with disabilities have appealed the dismissal of their claim under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act alleging denial of beneficial medical treatment to their children on the basis of disability. State courts continue to examine the rights of competent and incompetent patients, including "mature minors," to forgo life-sustaining treatment, including nutrition and hydration. In 1990, forty states and the District of Columbia had "living will" legislation, and nineteen states and the District of Columbia had durable power of attorney for health care laws; however, the provisions of these laws vary from state to state.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Addressing racial inequities in health care: civil rights monitoring and report cards.

Large racial inequities in health care use continue to be reported, raising concerns about discrimination. Historically, the health system, with its professionally dominated, autonomous, voluntary organizational structure, has presented special challenges to civil rights efforts. De jure racial segregation in the United States gave way to a period of aggressive litigation and enforcement from 1954 until 1968 and then to the current period of relative inactivity. A combination of factors--declining federal resources and organizational capacity to address more subtle forms of discriminatory practices in health care settings, increasingly restrictive interpretations by the courts, and the lack of any systematic mechanisms for the statistical monitoring of providers--offers little assurance that discrimination does not continue to play a role in accounting for discrepancies in use. The current rapid transformation of health care into integrated delivery systems driven by risk-based financing presents both new opportunities and new threats. Adequate regulation, markets, and management for such systems impose new requirements for comparative systematic statistical assessment of performance. My conclusion illustrates ways that current "report card" approaches to monitoring performance of such systems could be used to monitor, correct, and build trust in equitable treatment.

Adolescent↗