Wagner Logo

Follow us on Twitter View our profile on LinkedIn Like us on Facebook 




David G. Gabor, Esq. 

 David Gabor is widely recognized as an expert in the area of employment, human resources and business law. He has been called upon to proactively represent clients in litigation, the negotiation and drafting of contracts, handling compliance issues, the creation of corporate infrastructure, the drafting of policies, training of employees and leading companies towards organizational excellence. 





The Wagner Law Group

The Wagner Law Group is a nationally recognized practice in the areas of ERISA, employee benefits and executive compensation, trusts and estates, employment, labor and human resources, litigation, investment management, immigration, family and municipal law.


Established in 1996, The Wagner Law Group is dedicated to the highest standards of integrity, excellence and thought leadership and is considered to be amongst the nation's premier ERISA and employee benefits law firms. The firm has seven offices across the country, providing unparalleled legal advice to its clients, including large, small and nonprofit corporations as well as individuals and government entities worldwide. The Wagner Law Group's 33 attorneys, senior benefits consultant and five paralegals combine many years of experience in their fields of practice with a variety of backgrounds. Seven of the attorneys are AV-rated by Martindale-Hubbell and six are Fellows of the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel, an invitation-only organization of nationally recognized employee benefits lawyers.  Seven of the firm's attorneys have been named to the prestigious Super Lawyers list for 2018, which highlights outstanding lawyers based on a rigorous selection process.








Contact Info

The Wagner Law Group


  Integrity | Excellence



Tel: (617) 357-5200 

Fax: (617) 357-5250 

99 Summer Street 

13th Floor

Boston, MA 02110


Washington, D.C.

Tel: (202) 969-2800


Fax: (202) 969-2568

 800 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Suite 810

Washington, D.C. 20006



Tel: (847) 990-9034

Fax: (847) 557-1312

190 South LaSalle Street

Suite 2100

Chicago, IL 60603



Palm Beach Gardens 

Tel: (561) 293-3590
Fax: (561) 293-3591
7108 Fairway Drive
Suite 125
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33418



Tel: (813) 603-2959

Fax: (813) 603-2961

101 East Kennedy Boulevard

Suite 2140
Tampa, FL  33602 


San Francisco

Tel: (415) 625-0002

Fax: (415) 358-8300

300 Montgomery Street

Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94104


St. Louis

Tel: (314) 236-0065

Fax: (314) 236-5743
25 W. Moody Avenue
St. Louis, MO  63119


Lincoln, MA
Tel: (617) 532-8080
Fax: (617) 532-9090
55 Old Bedford Road
Lincoln, MA 01773







August 15, 2018



Employment Law Alert


 Don't Overlook Age Discrimination: Lessons Learned from

the EEOC's Report




The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") recently issued a
report about age discrimination that reads like a wake-up call. Essentially, 50 years have passed since the passage of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") and age discrimination is still a significant problem in our society. The EEOC noted:

"After 50 years of a federal law whose purpose is to promote the employment of older workers based on ability, age discrimination remains too common and too accepted. Indeed, 6 out of 10 older workers have seen or experienced age discrimination in the workplace and 90 percent of those say it is common."

The report found that only 3% of those who have experienced age discrimination have complained to their employer or to a government agency. Three out of four older workers claim that age was an obstacle to finding a job. In fact, both finding as well as keeping a job has become more difficult for older workers. Statistics reflect an increase in the percentage of wrongful termination claims alleging violations of the ADEA. At the same time, studies demonstrate age-related bias in hiring, especially in areas such as the tech sector. Older people take longer to find work and are often forced to accept jobs at a lower rate of pay. The report also emphasizes the potentially significant financial consequences employers face should they engage in age discrimination. The EEOC cited several recently settled claims involving mandatory retirement policies, including: Johnson & Higgins for $28.1 million; and Sidley and Austin for $27.5 million. Other age discrimination claims involving 3M and Texas Roadhouse were resolved for $15 million and $12 million, respectively.


There are several steps that the EEOC recommends that employers take regarding the perils and risks associated with age-based bias. The first is to make a concerted effort to focus on changing practices and attitudes. An organization's leadership is critical in promoting a culture that is "committed to a multi-generational workplace where all workers can grow and thrive," according to the EEOC. This commitment can be reflected in hiring materials posted on websites and social media. It is also necessary to recognize, understand, and to then reject age-related assumptions and stereotypes. Also, it is good practice to include the subject of age in diversity and inclusion programs. Furthermore, it is recommended that employers take the time to teach recruiters and interviewers how to avoid assumptions and stereotypes that are based on age. Finally, it should be noted that statistics show that workers over the age of 50 have the highest levels of engagement in the workplace. As such, it would benefit any employer to implement retention strategies that are designed to avoid unexpected turnover and loss of institutional knowledge.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact  
David Gabor, head of The Wagner Law Group's employment law practice.  




This Newsletter is protected by copyright. Material appearing herein may be reproduced with appropriate credit.


This Newsletter is provided for information purposes by The Wagner Law Group to clients and others who may be interested in the subject matter, and may not be relied upon as specific legal advice.  This material is not to be construed as legal advice or legal opinions on specific facts. Under the Rules of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this material may be considered advertising.