Reverse Ageism


The Supreme Court will hear a case where younger workers are using a federal age-discrimination law to sue, claiming that General Dynamics new health-pension policy favors older employees. Lawyers for business interests cry foul, claiming that laws against age discrimination are only meant to protect the old against unfair treatment, not to ensure that they don't get special treatment that is actually better than the treatment younger workers receive.


NEXT: Bust out the Wet Noodle

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Ah, Unintended Consequences. And this is only the tip of the iceberg folks. Intergenerational warfare is on its way.

  2. Like Social Security doesn’t also do the same thing (we younger folk are working to support the aged).

    Personally, I love it when the proponents of this type of legislated social engineering get their own logic turned on them. When those white students sued U of Mich for its affirmative action policies (full disclosure: UofM grad 1993), I can almost hear a collective ‘wait a minute, that’s not what we meant…’ from the pro-diversity crowd. Of course now they’ve given up any pretense of objective ‘fairness’ and are arguing that it is beneficial to provide diversity (the diversity that comes from lowering standards, apparently) or necessary to correct historical wrongs (how about addressing the shitty public schools that minority students go to instead?).

    I’d like to see someone take the opportunity to shitcan the logic behind this, but they’ll probably end up making a ruling requiring ‘fairness’. Personally, I think the older employees should get better benefits. For the same reason the older employees tend to get paid more money – greater experience makes them more valuable to the organization. Sooner or later we’re all going to be on the ‘other’ side so what’s wrong with that?

  3. “I’m old…gimme, gimme, gimme!”

  4. heh heh.

    “Where’d you get all that money Grandpa?”

    “The government. I don’t need, I don’t want it, but if they stop payment I’ll raise hell!”

  5. Older people get discounts on all sorts of goods from #2 meals biggie-size with a coke to auto insurance to golf course admission. I was on this subject with a woman working the food counter at an A & W (burger joint). I told her I thought it was technically illegal to charge someone a different price for the exact same item, solely based on age. She said she thought it would only be illegal if you charged a person more money because of their status, but not less money as in the case of senior citizen discounts. LOL, she apparently didn’t see how ludicruous this arguement could be. ‘almost goes without saying that by that logic you could have a white male discount provided you weren’t in turn charging anyone else more money for the same service. Hmmmmm. Now that would be a way to put the practice to the test (and fast)!

  6. Society tends to view helping the aged as equitable, decent, fair, etc., and of course the companies like the PR spin they get out of it. That’s just the way it is.

  7. Why doesn’t somebody just engineer a society in which we all have the same age, gender, race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, and socio-economic background and get it over with? I suppose our good friends from the Far Left are working diligently on it…

  8. General Dynamics deserves this suit for their sheer stupidity. How difficult would it have been to offer the package to anyone with 30+ years of service instead of anyone more than fifty years old? That would achieve almost exactly the same outcome, without any “discrimination” headaches.

    Ideology aside, you’d think that the HR people at GD would know how to stay on the right side of the lawbook. I’m sure a few individuals in the HR dept. have become candidates for “involuntary retirement” – regardless of their ages.

  9. Harrison Bergeron as utopia…


  10. Now THERE’s someone who uses his brain as it was intended to be used.

    >>> … offer the package to anyone with 30+ years of service instead of anyone more than fifty years old

  11. Freaking brilliant. Don’t let the pig-in-the-python boomers get away with it.

  12. It’s symptomatic of the whole system we have set up in this country. Nearly every major entitlement represents a net transfer of wealth from the young to the old (e.g. SS, Medicare,…). Being 34 I particularly resent it since entitlements are ultimately unsustainable in nature, the beneficiaries refuse to repair the unsustainable nature of the programs but get most of the political attention, and I get stuck with the shaft.

    Take Social Security, for example. At best I’m looking at 10% being taken out of my paycheck, and getting 1-2% return (at best). Most likely, I will get nothing. Even a ultra-conservative 401(K) will get me 5% over 50 years. Why should I regard the system as anything but blatant theft?

    Now we have both parties pushing for huge perscription drug add-ons to old folks, whether or not they can afford it.

    I have no problem with helping those who cannot get by, but I resent helping those who can…


  13. What is the difference between, “I don’t want to hire you, you’re too old”, and “I don’t want to hire you, you’re only 21”. I say nothing.

  14. EMAIL:
    DATE: 05/20/2004 10:32:51
    The Tao’s principle is spontaneity.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.