Skip to main content

Metallic Products Sued By EEOC For Age Discrimination

Company Has Mandatory Retirement Policy and Fired Employee on His 70th Birthday

HOUSTON - A Houston manufacturer violated federal law by enforcing its mandatory retirement policy which required the discharge of employees when they reach age seventy, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit (Civil Action No. 4:10-cv-04783) in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division), Metallic Products had an unlawful mandatory retirement policy which required an employee to retire at the age of seventy (70). The Complaint alleges that, under the policy, Jeronimo Vidals was told there would be no work for him after he turned seventy, and he was discharged on his 70 th birthday.

According to R.J. Ruff, Jr., district director of the EEOC's Houston District Office, "Individuals who want to work past an employer’s presumed retirement age are particularly vulnerable to employment practices designed to remove older workers from the workforce. Employers have a responsibility to provide everyone the freedom to compete fairly in the workplace regardless of age."

Such policies violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). With rare exception, an employer may not force its employees to retire at any particular age. The EEOC filed the lawsuit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement. In the suit, the EEOC is seeking a permanent injunction prohibiting the company from engaging in employment discrimination, as well as back pay, liquidated damages and other relief for Mr. Vidals.

“The EEOC will aggressively prosecute all ADEA violations against employers who deny the rights and privileges of gainful employment to qualified, older individuals,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Jim Sacher.

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Anyone who believes he or she has been subjected to a discriminatory employment practice is encouraged to contact the EEOC's Houston District Office, which is located in downtown Houston on the sixth floor of the Mickey Leland Federal Building at 1919 Smith Street. Further information about the EEOC is available on the agency's web site at www.eeoc.gov.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

The U-Turn of Candace Owens: From Liberal Critic to Conservative Firebrand

Candace Owens’s career has been defined by one of the most dramatic and controversial political transformations in modern media. In less than a decade, she transitioned from a liberal critic of the Republican Party to a leading voice of the American conservative movement, only to have her time at the top of established conservative media end over a final, divisive shift in rhetoric. Here is a look at the journey that defined her political evolution, culminating in her emergence as a powerful, independent media force. Phase 1: The Anti-Trump Democrat (Pre-2017) Before her political transformation, Candace Owens was known for holding typical liberal views and actively criticizing the Republican Party and its most controversial new figure. Initial Stance: Owens was an outspoken critic of Donald Trump, reportedly publishing articles mocking him and the "bat-s**t crazy antics of the Republican Tea Party." The Turning Point: This initial phase ended following a failed a...