•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The 1978 Amendments to the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which generally prohibit mandatory retirement before the age of seventy, have been criticized as proposing to "extend freedom of choice by restricting freedom of contract. Despite such criticisms and other less philosophical objections to the Act, the 108th Maine Legislature in 1977 passed the first part of a legislative program which, as of January 1, 1980, prohibits all mandatory retirement in Maine, in both the public and private sectors. Emphasizing the parallels between age discrimination legislation and other civil rights legislation, one of the bill's senate supporters acknowledged the difficulty of implementing this dramatic change in public policy. He called upon his colleagues to support the bill, saying, "[It] is actually going to make a very, very important change in the kind of society in which we live," affording to the elderly the dignity to which they are entitled and to which we give lip service. Although it is too early for any significant assessment of its practical impact, Maine's bill seems an excellent model for other states seeking to end age discrimination. While it will undoubtedly leave a sharp, but not necessarily negative, impression on corporate benefit and personnel policies, it has a sound basis which incorporates important individual and societal interests. Following a brief socio-historical overview to provide a perspective on age discrimination in employment, this Comment will attempt to forecast the scope of the bill's effects. Special emphasis will be placed on the contours of the ADEA, which strongly influenced the formulation of the Maine law. A comparison will be drawn between Maine's legislation and that of other states which have also attempted to eliminate age discrimination. Finally, the potential of this legislation for generating new perspectives on the structuring of the workforce and on personnel policy will be explored.

First Page

157

Download

Share

COinS