Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 25-1-21 (2026)
Discrimination Against Workers 40 Years of Age and Over - Prohibited.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
No employer, employment agency, or labor organization shall discriminate in employment against a worker 40 years of age and over in hiring, job retention, compensation, or other terms or conditions of employment.
(Acts 1997, No. 97-723, p. 1495, §2.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Bonham v. Regions Mortg., Inc., 129 F. Supp. 2d 1315 (M.D. Ala. 2001).
Bonham v. Regions Mortg., Inc., 129 F. Supp. 2d 1315 (M.D. Ala. 2001). “Compare 1975 Ala.Code § 25-1-21 ("No employer, employment agency, or labor organization shall discriminate in employment against a worker 40 years of age and over in hiring, job retention, compensation, or other terms or conditions of employment.”
Santini v. Cytec Indus., Inc., 537 F. Supp. 2d 1230 (S.D. Ala. 2008). “Procedural History The plaintiff in this action, John Santini, originally filed this case in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama, asserting four Counts: 1) Cytec terminated plaintiff because of his age in violation of Alabama Code § 25-1-21 et. seq., 2) Cytec…”
McQueen v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 955 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (N.D. Ala. 2013). “Code § 25-1-21 (“No employer, employment agency, or labor organization shall discriminate in employment against a worker 40 years of age and over in hiring, job retention, compensation, or other terms or conditions of employment”) (emphasis added).”
Bob Perry v. Batesville Casket Co., Inc., 551 F. App'x 987 (11th Cir. 2014). “” Ala. Code § 25-1-21 . The AADEA also specifically provides that “[a]ny employment practice authorized by the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act [“ADEA”] shall also be authorized by this article.”
Newman v. Career Consultants, Inc., 470 F. Supp. 2d 1333 (M.D. Ala. 2007). “Plaintiff’s Termination Claims Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant terminated Plaintiff on the basis of her race and age. Title VII and § 1981 prohibit termination on the basis of race.”
Collier v. Harland Clarke Corp., 379 F. Supp. 3d 1191 (N.D. Ala. 2019). “Gaitan testified that to her knowledge Harland Clarke had not overturned Unum's decisions with respect to other employees.”
Winnie Bailey v. Huntsville, City of, 517 F. App'x 857 (11th Cir. 2013). “On appeal, Bailey does not address her age discrimination claims under the Alabama Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Ala. Code § 25-1-21 , and thus, these claims are waived.”
Ehrhardt v. Haddad Restaurant Grp., Inc., 443 F. App'x 452 (11th Cir. 2011). “After review, 1 we affirm the district court. I. Under the AADEA, “[n]o employer .”
Lambert v. Mazer Disc. Home Centers, Inc., 33 So. 3d 18 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009). “” § 25-1-21. In Robinson, our supreme court, after considering the holdings of federal courts in Alabama, adopted the same burden-shifting analysis applied to federal age-discrimination claims brought under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.”
Marrie v. Tyson Foods, Inc. (N.D. Ala. 2020). “Analysis Alabama Code § 25-1-21 provides that “[n]o employer, employment agency, or labor organization shall discriminate in employment against a worker 40 years of age and over in hiring, job retention, compensation, or other terms or conditions of employment.”
Brown v. Mercedes-Benz US Int'l Inc (N.D. Ala. 2022). “” Ala. Code § 25-1-21 . 1. Some of Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations.”
Fulmer v. PCH Hotels & Resorts Inc (N.D. Ala. 2020). “§§ 623 (a), 631(a); Ala. Code § 25-1-21 . The same analytical framework applies to ADEA and AADEA age discrimination claims.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.