Hostile Work Environment Claims Under the ADEA: Lessons from the Seventh Circuit

Quick Hits

• The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals joined multiple other federal courts of appeals in finding that hostile work environment claims are viable under the ADEA.
• As part of stating an age discrimination claim, an employee must establish that the complained-of conduct is based on his or her age.
• Speculative and conclusory allegations are not sufficient to support a claim of age-based harassment.

Background

The plaintiff was a long-tenured and “exemplary” teacher with the Bloomington School District, in Bloomington, Illinois, who had taught at the same school for eighteen years until her transfer to another school to replace a struggling, less-experienced teacher. The transfer did not go smoothly, with the teacher alleging that she had been assigned a disproportionate number of behaviorally challenged students, erroneously criticized for her job performance, not provided with adequate classroom support, and, on one occasion, subjected to an administrator who acted in an intimidating manner toward her.

The teacher subsequently filed suit, contending that the school district’s actions and the behavior of her colleagues had created intolerable working conditions that were discriminatory based on her age. The federal district court disagreed, granting summary judgment for the school district and throwing out her claims.

The Seventh Circuit’s Key Findings

In upholding the school district’s victory, the court made several key points regarding the ADEA:

• Hostile work environment claims are viable under the ADEA. The ADEA prohibits discrimination against any individual aged forty and over “with respect to his [or her] compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment.” For the first time in the Seventh Circuit, the court specifically held that this prohibition includes hostile work environment claims. It noted that this language in the ADEA is identical to that of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964—the same language that was held by the Supreme Court of the United States to create a cause of action for hostile work environment harassment.
• There are four elements to a hostile work environment claim. The court reiterated that, in order to establish a hostile work environment claim, an employee must establish the following: (1) that she was subject to unwelcome harassment; (2) the harassment was based on her age; (3) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile or abusive atmosphere; and (4) there is a basis for holding the employer liable. Here, however, the court found that the teacher was unable to meet all of the elements—in particular, she could not demonstrate that age-based animus motivated any of the complained-of conduct.
• Speculation will not support a hostile work environment claim. The court noted that the only evidence supporting the teacher’s age discrimination claim was her own belief that she was being treated poorly because of her age, which was “purely speculative and conclusory.” There was simply no evidence linking the complained-of conduct to the teacher’s age.
• It is the plaintiff’s burden to establish age discrimination. The court emphasized that it was the teacher’s burden to show that the employer was motivated by age discrimination, rather than the employer’s burden to show it was not—and here, the teacher could not make that showing.

Implications for Employers

This case highlights several important takeaways for employers. First, a hostile work environment can arise based on an employee’s age, as well as race, religion, sex, and other legally protected characteristics under federal (and state) laws. Thus, employers should ensure that they have robust policies prohibiting hostile work environment harassment on the basis of any legally protected personal characteristic. Employees should be made aware of these policies, through handbooks or otherwise, and employers should consider training managers on the implementation of these policies. Finally, prompt and effective action taken to address complaints of harassment can reinforce and promote a harassment-free workplace and mitigate liability.

Ogletree Deakins will continue to monitor developments and will provide updates on the Employment Law and State Developments blog as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts