U.S. Code » Title 29 » Chapter CHAPTER 14— AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT

29 U.S.C. § 631

Age limits

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Individuals at least 40 years of age

The prohibitions in this chapter shall be limited to individuals who are at least 40 years of age.

(b) Employees or applicants for employment in Federal Government

In the case of any personnel action affecting employees or applicants for employment which is subject to the provisions of section 633a of this title, the prohibitions established in section 633a of this title shall be limited to individuals who are at least 40 years of age.

(c) Bona fide executives or high policymakers(1) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit compulsory retirement of any employee who has attained 65 years of age and who, for the 2-year period immediately before retirement, is employed in a bona fide executive or a high policymaking position, if such employee is entitled to an immediate nonforfeitable annual retirement benefit from a pension, profit-sharing, savings, or deferred compensation plan, or any combination of such plans, of the employer of such employee, which equals, in the aggregate, at least $44,000.(2) In applying the retirement benefit test of paragraph (1) of this subsection, if any such retirement benefit is in a form other than a straight life annuity (with no ancillary benefits), or if employees contribute to any such plan or make rollover contributions, such benefit shall be adjusted in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, so that the benefit is the equivalent of a straight life annuity (with no ancillary benefits) under a plan to which employees do not contribute and under which no rollover contributions are made.(Pub. L. 90–202, § 12, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 607; Pub. L. 95–256, § 3(a), (b)(3), Apr. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 189, 190; 1978 Reorg. Plan No. 1, § 2, eff. Jan. 1, 1979, 43 F.R. 19807, 92 Stat. 3781; Pub. L. 98–459, title VIII, § 802(c)(1), Oct. 9, 1984, 98 Stat. 1792; Pub. L. 99–272, title IX, § 9201(b)(2), Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 171; Pub. L. 99–592, §§ 2(c), 6(a), Oct. 31, 1986, 100 Stat. 3342, 3344; Pub. L. 101–239, title VI, § 6202(b)(3)(C)(ii), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2233.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1989—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–239 struck out “(except the provisions of section 623(g) of this title)” after “in this chapter”.

1986—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–592, § 2(c)(1), which directed that “but less than seventy years of age” be struck out was executed by striking out “but less than 70 years of age” after “40 years of age” as the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 99–272 inserted “(except the provisions of section 623(g) of this title)” after “this chapter”.

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 99–592, § 2(c)(2), which directed that “but not seventy years of age,” be struck out was executed by striking out “but not 70 years of age,” after “65 years of age” as the probable intent of Congress.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 99–592, § 6(a), (b), temporarily added subsec. (d) which read as follows: “Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit compulsory retirement of any employee who has attained 70 years of age, and who is serving under a contract of unlimited tenure (or similar arrangement providing for unlimited tenure) at an institution of higher education (as defined by section 1141(a) of title 20).” See Effective and Termination Dates of 1986 Amendments note below.

1984—Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 98–459 substituted “$44,000” for “$27,000”.

1978—Pub. L. 95–256, § 3(a), designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), substituted “40 years of age but less than 70 years of age” for “forty years of age but less than sixty-five years of age”, added subsecs. (b) and (c), and temporarily added subsec. (d). See Effective and Termination Dates of 1978 Amendment note below.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1989 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–239 applicable to items and services furnished after Dec. 19, 1989, see section 6202(b)(5) of Pub. L. 101–239, set out as a note under section 162 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Effective and Termination Dates of 1986 Amendments

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–592 effective Jan. 1, 1987, with certain exceptions, see section 7(a) of Pub. L. 99–592 set out as a note under section 623 of this title.

Pub. L. 99–592, § 6(b), Oct. 31, 1986, 100 Stat. 3344, provided that: “The amendment made by subsection (a) of this section [amending this section] is repealed December 31, 1993.”

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–272 effective May 1, 1986, see section 9201(d)(2) of Pub. L. 99–272, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendment note under section 1395p of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Pub. L. 98–459, title VIII, § 802(c)(2), Oct. 9, 1984, 98 Stat. 1792, provided that: “The amendment made by paragraph (1) of this subsection [amending this section] shall not apply with respect to any individual who retires, or is compelled to retire, before the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 9, 1984].”

Effective and Termination Dates of 1978 Amendment

Pub. L. 95–256, § 3(b), Apr. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 190, provided that:“(1) Sections 12(a), 12(c), and 12(d) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended by subsection (a) of this section [subsecs. (a), (c), and (d) of this section] shall take effect on January 1, 1979.“(2) Section 12(b) of such Act, as amended by subsection (a) of this section [subsec. (b) of this section], shall take effect on September 30, 1978.“(3) Section 12(d) of such Act, as amended by subsection (a) of this section [enacting subsec. (d) of this section], is repealed on July 1, 1982.”

Executive DocumentsTransfer of Functions

“Equal Employment Opportunity Commission” substituted for “Secretary”, meaning Secretary of Labor, in subsec. (c)(2) pursuant to Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1978, § 2, 43 F.R. 19807, 92 Stat. 3781, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, which transferred all functions vested by this section in Secretary of Labor to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, effective Jan. 1, 1979, as provided by section 1–101 of Ex. Ord. No. 12106, Dec. 28, 1978, 44 F.R. 1053.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,070 cases (188 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents (2000) scotus · cites it 4× “607 , 29 U. S. C. § 631 (1964 ed., Supp. III), Congress subsequently removed the upper age limit, and the Act now covers individuals age 40 and over, 29 U.”
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. (2000) scotus · cites it 2× “It is undisputed that petitioner satisfied this burden here: (i) at the time he was fired, he was a member of the class protected by the ADEA ("individuals who are at least 40 years of age," 29 U. S. C. § 631 (a)), (ii) he was otherwise qualified for the position of Hinge Room…”
Moses Passer v. American Chemical Society (1991) cadc · cites it 6× “See 29 U.S.C. § 631 (c)(1) (1988). With regard to his reprisal claims under ADEA and the D.”
Rudolph Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works LLC (2017) ca3 · cites it 2× “” 29 U.S.C. § 631 (a). ADEA claims may proceed under a disparate-impact or disparate-treatment theory.”
Richard M. Villarreal v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (2016) ca11 · cites it 2× “§ 623 (d); 29 U.S.C. § 631 (b); 29 U.S.C. §§ 633a(a), (b).”
General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline (2004) scotus · cites it 2× “Respondents (collectively, Cline) were then at least 40 and thus protected by the Act, see 29 U. S. C. § 631 (a), but under 50 and so without promise of the benefits.”
James R. WHITE, Appellant, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, Appellee (1989) ca3 · cites it 3× “Westinghouse retained three members of the Transportation Department under 40 years of age, and therefore not in the protected class. This establishes a pri-ma facie case and shifts to Westinghouse the burden of producing some legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for…”
Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins (1993) scotus · cites it 2× “An employee who is younger than 40, and therefore outside the class of older workers as defined by the ADEA, see 29 U. S. C. § 631 (a), may have worked for a particular employer his entire career, while an older worker may have been newly hired.”
Devon Shelley v. Pete Geren (2012) ca9 · cites it 2× “” 29 U.S.C. § 631 (a). The ADEA applies to protect federal employees and applicants for federal employment.”
Sandra L. SIMPSON Appellant, v. KAY JEWELERS, DIVISION OF STERLING, INC. (1998) ca3 · cites it 2× “at least 40 years of age, 29 U.S.C. § 631 (a), (2) is qualified for the position, (3) suffered an adverse employment decision, and (4) in the case of a demotion or discharge, was replaced by a sufficiently younger person to create an inference of age discrimination, Chipollini v.”
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wyoming (1983) scotus · cites it 2× “4 The protection of the Act was limited, however, to workers between the ages of 40 and 65, § 12(a), 29 U. S. C. § 631 , raised to age 70 in 1978, Age Discrimination in Employment Act Amendments of 1978, § 3(a), 92 Stat.”
Saenger v. Montefiore Medical Center (2010) nysd · cites it 2× “See 29 U.S.C. § 631 (a) (defining the class protected by the ADEA as “individuals who are at least 40 years of age”).”
Show all 1,070 citing cases →
— 29 U.S.C. § 631(a) — 9 cases
Torrech-Hernández v. General Electric Co. (2008) ca1
Rogosin v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore (2002) mdd
Ireton-Hewitt v. Champion Home Builders Co. (2007) nynd
Martin v. ALUMAX OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC. (2005) scd
Ace Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union Number 292 (2005) ca8
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.