An EEOC probe into a mandatory retirement age policy at a San Diego-based physicians group has resulted in a massive settlement without the group admitting to any liability in the matter. The Scripps Clinic age discrimination case revolved around a 2014 policy that mandated that physicians had to retire from their role in the group at the age of 75 in order to ensure patient safety. In response to this, the Scripps Clinic Medical Group lawsuit alleged that the organization had violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1975 by forcing physicians into retirement. The ADEA protects employees above the age of 40 from any bias and discrimination in a professional setting. The Scripps $6.8 million age bias settlement is a sign of the EEOC’s unrelenting efforts to eradicate age discrimination within the workplace.
Image – Freepik
EEOC Probes Mandatory Retirement Age Policy: Understanding the Scripps Clinic Medical Group Lawsuit
The mandatory retirement age policy at the Scripps Clinic Medical Group (SCMG) was enforced way back in 2014, seemingly in line with California’s own legal regulations, which required physicians associated with the group to retire on reaching 75. According to Scripps Clinic, California law supports the mandatory retirement of physicians employed by a professional medical corporation at the age of 70 so they were within the legal bounds of the state. The retirement policy went into effect in 2016 and the group believed that this guaranteed patient safety and ensured they received the best care from their physicians. However, after an EEOC review in 2018 found the policy to be a violation of federal rule, it was rescinded and has not been in use in the five years since.
Despite this, the EEOC probe into the mandatory retirement age policy was followed by a lawsuit and the company chose to settle instead of engaging in prolonged legal battles with the federal court. The Scripps Clinic age discrimination case ended without SCMG admitting any wrongdoings, standing by their decision but settling for $6.8 million with the intention to put an end to the issue.
The Scripps $6.8 million age bias settlement will be given to all the physicians who were affected by the policy before it was removed in 2018. The organization will also have to make a formal announcement to all employees about the removal of the policy and clarify that there are no other age-based restrictions at the organization.
The EEOC Strategic Enforcement Plan Fiscal Years 2024 – 2028
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has been dialing up its efforts to protect the U.S. population and the extensive focus on age-based discrimination is just one component of its Strategic Enforcement Plan for the upcoming years. Following considerable deliberation and public input, the EEOC was able to narrow down its priorities, carefully considering the socio-political climate and the disproportionately vulnerable population. In the SEP, the main subject matters that have been prioritize are:
- Eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring
- Protecting vulnerable workers and persons from underserved communities from employment discrimination
- Addressing selected emerging and developing issues such as the protection of pregnant workers, individuals with disabilities, those facing discrimination due to historical prejudice, etc.
- Advancing equal pay for all workers covered by federal anti-discrimination laws, including race, national origin, disability, and age, and at the intersection of protected bases
- Preserving access to the legal system
- Preventing and remedying systemic harassment
- District and federal sector-specific priorities
The EEOC’s commitment to protecting vulnerable workers is clear from the current EEOC probe into the mandatory retirement age policy at Scripps Clinic but this is not the end of their efforts. The SEP for 2024-2028 is very clear that discrimination against older workers will not be entertained, whether in pay or while considering opportunities that workers could hope to receive. The commission will oversee any form of systemic harassment and employers need to be more proactive with reporting issues to them if they want to seek support for any reason covered under the federal law and that falls within the purview of the EEOC.
Best Practices for Healthcare Organizations to Avoid Age Bias
While the EEOC does its best to safeguard the interests of the employees, organizations can take measures to ensure they don’t find themselves in a similar position to the Scripps Clinic Medical Group lawsuit. The organization’s policy did fall within the guidelines of the state law but the federal laws were ignored in the process, leading to the Scripps Clinic age discrimination case.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, around 25 percent of the workforce will be 55 and above in 2024. Companies need to take some precautions to ensure their policies are inclusive towards them. There are certain considerations that organizations need to acknowledge while making policies and running an organization.
- Ensure all new policies are in accordance with both state and federal laws—consult a legal professional for policy changes if necessary to ensure all the intricacies of laws are considered
- Regularly review existing policies and update those that might be outdated
- Review recruitment policies and engage in blind recruitment practices to eliminate the potential for bias
- Create panels that can collectively offer insight into critical decisions with regard to the organization policies
- Establish fixed assessment criteria and promotion policies that can be applied to all employees equally
- Promote intergenerational interaction and learning to guarantee the flow of knowledge
- Provide regular sensitivity training and anti-discriminatory teachings to ensure the employees are aware of the company’s stance on discrimination—review the organizational culture
- Train managers and other leaders to oversee the enforcement of equal opportunities for all employees
- The EEOC recommends assessing your organization, examining your recruitment practices, including age as a part of diversity programs, and fostering a multigenerational culture that recognizes ability
SHRM recommends being careful about the language used within an organization that directly or indirectly alludes to wanting a younger, livelier population. While hiring, terms like digital natives, high-energy, ninjas, overqualified, etc. should be avoided. If employees are truly outpaced by the industry and are unable to keep up despite training and support from the organization, it is up to the company to let go of such individuals. But unfair treatment just due to age without a review of performance is discriminatory and can lead to legal repercussions like those we saw in the Scripps Clinic age discrimination case.
