Unions' role in intersectional age discrimination litigation cases

• Published in: Employee relations 2023-02, Vol.45 (2), p.328-344
• Main Authors: Katz, Marsha, LaVan, Helen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age discrimination; Employees; Employment discrimination; Supreme Court decisions
• ISSN: 0142-5455; 1758-7069
• DOI: 10.1108/ER-09-2021-0394

PurposeHow older workers pursue their employment discrimination claims is the focus of this study. This is part of the broader question of how older, unionized employees pursuing their statutory rights fare in litigation and how unions might organize and subsequently better protect older workers who have been discriminated against.Design/methodology/approachThis study is a random sample of 1889 litigated age discrimination cases in Federal courts using NVivo to conduct a content analysis on unionization, individual, organizational and legal variables.FindingsAn analysis of case characteristics and outcomes in cases filed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act indicated that older unionized workers pursuing their claims are more likely to have rulings in their favor. Other demographic characteristics of the cases in which unionized workers prevailed include seniority, disability, filing under Title VII and cases involving retaliation.Research limitations/implicationsImportantly, empirical legal scholarship, using the case as the unit of analysis, will significantly add to the understanding of how age discrimination might be reduced through litigation. Empirical legal scholarship strategies would also suggest identifying labor tribunal or arbitration cases. Using content analysis would allow for a deep understanding at the micro level of the context that led to the charges of age (or other types) of discrimination.Practical implicationsThis study offers evidence that union representation can add value when older employees are pursuing their rights in litigation.Originality/valueThis research focuses on individuals who have actually been discriminated against using empirical legal scholarship, content analysis and big data analytics.