121.11 Lower age limit; comparative ages of employees

The fact that the Complainant’s comparators were also in the protected age group does not defeat her claim of age discrimination where there was a significant age difference between the Complainant and the employees she claims were treated more favorably. Waldvogel v. DC Everest Area Sch. Dist. (LIRC, 03/22/19).

The fact that the individual hired for the job was also a member of the protected age group does not defeat an allegation of age discrimination where there is a significant age difference between the Complainant and the successful candidate. Butler v. UW Madison Sch. of Educ. (LIRC, 07/31/17).

There is no absolute rule that a Complainant cannot prevail on an age discrimination claim where the age difference between the Complainant and his comparators is only five years. However, a five-year age difference is not so significant that, standing on its own, it gives rise to an inference of age discrimination. Ebner v. Dura Tech (LIRC, 04/23/09).

The Respondent was not immunized from a complaint of age discrimination because it replaced the Complainant with another person over the age of forty, where there was a significant difference in age between the Complainant and the individual who replaced the Complainant. Felsman v. Northwest Airlines (LIRC, 06/06/96).

A complaint alleging age discrimination does not state a cause of action where the complaining party is 36 years old. Gray v. Asbestos Workers, Local No. 19 (DILHR, 04/15/75).