Nuna bambanci na Shekaru a cikin Dokar Aiki ta 1967

Dokar nuna bambanci na Shekaru a cikin Ayyuka ta 1967 (**ADEA**; 29 U.S.C.. § zuwa 29 U.S.C. §) doka ce ta aiki ta Amurka wacce ta hana nuna bambanci ga kowa, akalla shekaru 40, a Amurka (duba 29 U.S.C. §). A shekara ta 1967, Shugaba Lyndon B. Johnson ya sanya hannu kan dokar. ADEA ta hana nuna bambancin shekaru kuma tana ba da damar yin aiki daidai a ƙarƙashin yanayin da ba a rufe su a bayyane a cikin Title VII na Dokar 'Yancin Bil'adama ta 1964 ba.  Dokar ta kuma shafi ka'idojin fansho da fa'idodi da masu daukar ma'aikata suka bayar, kuma tana buƙatar a ba da bayani game da bukatun tsofaffin ma'aikata ga jama'a. 

## Yankin kariya
ADEA ta haɗa da haramtacciyar nuna bambanci ga ma'aikata, sama da shekaru arba'in, kuma musamman, dokar ta haramta:

* nuna bambanci a cikin daukar ma'aikata, ci gaba, albashi, da dakatar da aiki da sallamawa;
* maganganun ƙayyadaddun ƙayƙwalwa a cikin zaɓin shekaru ko iyakancewa;
* hana amfanin tsofaffin ma'aikata: ma'aikaci na iya rage fa'idodi dangane da shekaru, kawai idan farashin samar da raguwar fa'idori ga tsofaffin ma-aikata daidai yake da farashin samar da cikakkun fa'iduri ga matasa ma'aikata; da
* tun daga shekara ta 1986, ya haramta yin ritaya a yawancin bangarori, tare da kawar da ritaya na tilas ga ma'aikatan aiki, kamar farfesa na kwaleji, a cikin 1993.

An ba da izinin yin ritaya bisa ga shekaru don:

* masu gudanarwa sama da shekaru 65 a manyan mukamai masu tsara manufofi, waɗanda ke da damar samun fansho a kan mafi ƙarancin tsawon shekara-shekara.

Ya shafi ma'aikata, waɗanda ke daukar ma'aikata akalla ashirin a kai a kai a cikin shekara ta yanzu ko ta baya.

## Gyara
An yi wa ADEA gyare-gyare a cikin 1986, da kuma a cikin 1991, ta hanyar Dokar Kare Amfanin Ma'aikata (Pub. L. 101-433) da Dokar 'Yancin Bil'adama ta 1991 (Pubub. L, 102-166).

## Shari'ar shari'a
ADEA ta bambanta da Dokar 'Yancin Bil'adama a cikin cewa, ADEA ta shafi ma'aikata 20 ko fiye (duba 29 U.S.C. §) maimakon ma'aikata 15 ko fiye. Dukkanin ayyukan biyu duk da haka, sun shafi masu daukar ma'aikata ne kawai a cikin masana'antun da ke shafar kasuwancin jihohi. Ma'aikata 20 na iya haɗawa da ma'aikatan ƙasashen waje.

Yana kare 'yan ƙasar Amurka da ke aiki ga ma'aikatan Amurka da ke zaune a kasashen waje, sai dai inda zai keta dokokin ƙasar.

Ana iya ƙayyade iyakar shekaru bisa doka a cikin yanayin, inda aka nuna shekaru a matsayin "ƙwarewar aiki mai kyau [BFOQ], wanda ya dace da aikin al'ada na takamaiman kasuwanci" (duba 29 U.S.C. § 623 (f) (1)). A aikace, BFOQs don shekaru suna iyakance ga bayyane (haɗin matashi mai wasan kwaikwayo don yin wasa da matashi a cikin fim) ko kuma lokacin da tsaron jama'a ke cikin haɗari (alal misali, idan akwai iyakar shekaru ga matukan jirgi da direbobin bas).

ADEA ba ta hana ma'aikaci ya fi son ma'aikacin da ya tsufa a kan ƙarami ba, koda lokacin da ƙarami ya wuce shekaru 40. Koyaya, irin wannan aikin na iya zama ba bisa ka'ida ba a jihohi kamar New Jersey, New York, da Gundumar Columbia inda ma'aikata masu shekaru 18 da haihuwa ke karewa daga nuna bambancin shekaru, sabili da haka, ma'aikata ba za su iya ba da fifiko ga ma'aikata matasa ko tsofaffi ba.

Kotun Koli ta Amurka, a cikin *Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory*, 554 U.S. 84 (2008), ta yanke hukuncin cewa ma'aikaci, ba ma'aikacin ba, yana ɗauke da nauyin tabbatar da cewa sallamawa ko wani mataki wanda ke cutar da tsofaffin ma'aikata fiye da wasu ya dogara ba da shekaru ba amma a kan wasu "abubuwa mai ma'ana".

A cikin Gomez-Perez v. Potter (2008), Kotun Koli ta ba da izinin ma'aikatan tarayya, waɗanda ke fuskantar ramuwar gayya sakamakon bayar da rahoton nuna bambancin shekaru a ƙarƙashin doka, don kai karar lalacewa.

A cikin *[[Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents|Kimel v. Florida Bd.]]*  *[[Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents|na Regents]]*, 528 US 62 (2000), Kotun Koli ta yanke hukuncin cewa ma'aikatan jihar ba za su iya kai karar jihohi ba saboda lalacewar kudi a karkashin ADEA a kotun tarayya. EEOC na iya ci gaba da tilasta ADEA a kan jihohi, kuma ma'aikatan jihohi na iya kai karar jami'an jihohi don tallafi da umarni.

A cikin *Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.*, 557 U.S. 167 (2009), Kotun Koli ta yanke hukuncin cewa mai shigar da kara dole ne ya tabbatar da wannan shekarun shine "amma don" dalilin aikin da aka kalubalanci.

*[[Babb v. Wilkie]]* shari'ar Kotun Koli ce, wacce ta yi la'akari da fa'ida da faɗin ADEA. A ciki, kotun ta yanke hukuncin cewa masu shigar da kara kawai suna buƙatar tabbatar da cewa shekaru sun kasance abin motsawa a cikin yanke shawara don kai karar. Koyaya, kafa amma don haifar har yanzu yana da mahimmanci don ƙayyade maganin da ya dace. Hukuncin Babb v. Wilkie ya shafi ma'aikatan sashen tarayya kawai. Idan mai shigar da kara zai iya tabbatar da cewa shekarun shine abin da ya sa ya zama abin ƙayyade sakamakon aiki, suna iya samun damar biyan diyya ko wasu taimako da suka shafi sakamakon yanke shawara na aiki.

## Magunguna
Magungunan ADEA sun haɗa da biyan diyya ga ma'aikaci ko lalacewa idan sake dawowa ba zai yiwu ba kuma / ko keta doka da ma'aikacin da gangan. Duk da yake lalacewar azabtarwa a ƙarƙashin ADEA ba ta samuwa, idan keta doka da gangan, masu shigar da kara suna da damar biyan bashin / Lalacewar doka watau sau biyu na biyan bashin baya / biyan bashin gaba.

## Tsaro
Tsaro na doka  ga ikirarin ADEA sun hada da / wannan

* ma'aikata na iya tilasta watsi da ikirarin nuna bambancin shekaru da aka yi ba tare da EEOC ko amincewar kotu ba idan watsi da "sanin ko son rai"; 
* yarjejeniyar sasantawa mai inganci tsakanin ma'aikata da ma'aikatan da ke rufe rikicin suna ƙarƙashin sasantawa ta tilas kuma ba za a iya kawo wani mataki na kotu ba; 
* ma'aikata na iya sallamar ko horo ga ma'aikaci don "mahimmanci mai kyau," ba tare da la'akari da shekarun ma'aikacin ba;
* ma'aikata na iya ɗaukar mataki bisa ga "abubuwa masu ma'ana ban da shekaru"; 
* cancantar aiki mai aminci, tsarin tsufa, amfanin ma'aikaci ko shirye-shiryen ritaya da wuri; da
* sa kai ritaya da wuri.

## Manazarta