In a bid to foster economic sustainability, the United States (U.S) federal government has formulated several laws and policies. These laws and policies are geared towards economic stabilization and promotion of proper work ethics. One such Act is the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). This Act was substantially amended in 1974 and 1978 following its enactment in 1967. Generally, it prohibits employment discrimination by public and private employers, employment agencies, and labor unions. Coverage under this Act is limited to employees and applicants whose ages range between forty and seventy years (Neumark, 2009) . This paper will briefly describe the Act and its impact on employees. It will also explore how association and employer policies can be used in supplementing existing legal requirements, particularly when an organization seeks to protect its clients and employees from discrimination.
Normative grounds for the enactment of the ADEA remain uncertain. Nevertheless, the Act plays a crucial role in shaping the employment landscape in the U.S. The ADEA provides defense against age discrimination based on the bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the regular operation of a particular business (Richardson, 2010) . Another essential role of the act is that it prohibits arbitrary age discrimination in the field of employment and helps both employers and employees define ways to meet issues arising from the effects of age in employment. Due to the implementation of the Act, there have been reduced cases of the firing of older workers in comparison to other age groups. This reduction can be attributed to hiring firms' quest to avoid the cost associated with a lawsuit under the ADEA. Several companies have been seen to engage older workers reluctantly, and their reasons are limited to disputes involved in firing such a workforce.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Irrespective of settings, both employment agencies and private employers should always strive to uphold strict adherence to the Act ( v on Schrader & Nazarov, 201 6 ) . Employer’s non-discrimination policy entails conditions that cover all stages of employment, including hiring, promotions, termination of the job, and compensation. Sexual orientation and gender-based policies should also be included in the federally protected class enclosed in the non-discrimination policies. Referencing sexual orientation and gender identity in anti-harassment policies sends a strong message to all employers (von Schrader & Nazarov, 2016) . With such measures in place, all parties involved are likely to be respected and thus freed from any intentional harassment.
All employers are expected to foster a working environment that promotes the treatment of all individuals with respect and dignity. In this quest, employers should formulate and implement policies that enlighten their respective employees on what discrimination is, and what harassment entails. Likewise, the workforce ought to be aware of the consequences of perpetrating such vices. Complaint procedures should be highlighted, and steps are taken to promote the implementation and effectiveness of the policies.
For a state's economy to grow, there has to be a high employment rate to generate enough revenue to support various government initiatives. The U.S government, in a bid to promote this, has focused on the formulation of Acts and policies that aim to protect both employers and employees. The ADEA was enacted in 1967 by the federal government to help protect the aged from any discriminatory motives by employers. Over the years, the Act has evolved in conjunction with other supplemental legal requirements to see those aged between forty and seventy years enjoy their work environments just like their younger counterparts. This has been crucial in not only keeping the aged engaged but also in ensuring that the government maintains enough workforce to facilitate its development agenda. The latter has been achieved through revenue generation. Overall, the importance of ADEA in advancing the country’s development agenda cannot be overstated.
References
Neumark, D. (2009). The Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the challenge of population aging. Research on Aging , 31 (1), 41-68. Doi: 10.1177/0164027508324640
Richardson, R. (2010). Equality Priorities and Equality Objectives–the Equality Act 2010, a cautious welcome. Race Equality Teaching , 28 (2), 6-11. Doi: 10.18546/ret.28.2.03
von Schrader, S., & Nazarov, Z. E. (2016). Trends and patterns in age discrimination in employment act (ADEA) charges. Research on Aging , 38 (5), 580-601.
