About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

81 Denv. U. L. Rev. 79 (2003-2004)
Sex Plus Age Discrimination: Protecting Older Women Workers

handle is hein.journals/denlr81 and id is 89 raw text is: SEX PLUS AGE DISCRIMINATION: PROTECTING OLDER WOMEN WORKERS NICOLE BUONOCORE PORTERt INTRODUCTION There is little doubt that sexism and ageism still exist. To remedy these isms, there are laws to protect both women and older workers from discrimination in the workplace, namely Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII),' which prohibits sex discrimination as well as discrimination based on many other protected categories,2 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),3 which pro- hibits age discrimination.4 Despite these protections, an older woman cannot bring a claim based on the fact that she feels she was discrimi- nated against because she is an older woman. In other words, her claim must be brought either on the basis of her sex or on the basis of her age, but not on the basis of both her sex and age combined.5 This Article pro- poses to remedy what this Author believes is a serious shortcoming in our employment discrimination laws. In 1980, courts first recognized that Title VII should protect black women as a separate protected category, distinct from protections af- forded sex or race alone.6 In other words, the courts realized that black women were discriminated against differently from other women, and differently from black men. Accordingly, in cases where a race discrimi- nation claim or gender discrimination claim would fail (because statistics revealed that race or gender alone was not an indicia of discrimination), courts were willing to consider black women as a protected subclass.7 This is often referred to as sex plus race discrimination, and courts t Assistant Professor of Law, Saint Louis University School of Law, Effective July 2004. B.A., 1992 Michigan State University; J.D. 1998, magna cum laude, Order of the Coif, University of Michigan Law School. 1. Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000). 2. Id. § 2000e-2(a) (prohibiting discriminatory employment practices based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin). 3. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (2000). 4. Id. §§ 623(a)-(c). 5. This is not to suggest, however, that her complaint cannot allege both sex discrimination and age discrimination, only that each claim will be analyzed separately. 6. See, e.g., Jefferies v. Harris County Cmty. Action Ass'n, 615 F.2d 1025, 1032-33 (5th Cir. 1980) (explaining that the purposes of the statute would not be served if a black woman was dis- criminated against but could not gain relief because she could not establish a claim based on sex or race alone). 7. See id.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most