Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston

Background

TWA, a commercial airline, had a rule requiring cockpit crew to retire at age 60. After Congress amended the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in 1978, TWA allowed pilots to continue as flight engineers only if they obtained that status through seniority bidding. Captains disqualified for other reasons could automatically displace (“bump”) less senior flight engineers, but 60-year-old captains were denied that automatic transfer. Three retired captains sued, claiming the policy treated them worse because of age.

Reasoning

The Court asked two basic questions: did the policy unlawfully discriminate on the basis of age, and was the violation “willful” so as to allow double (liquidated) damages? The Court found direct evidence that TWA’s policy denied the transfer privilege to captains solely because of age, and therefore violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The Court rejected defenses that age was a required qualification for the flight engineer job or that the practice was protected by the seniority system. On liquidated damages, the Court adopted a “know or reckless disregard” standard for willfulness, but concluded that TWA had sought legal advice, consulted the union, and acted in good faith, so its violation was not willful.

Real world impact

Employers that grant workplace benefits to displaced employees cannot deny the same benefits to older workers if age is the only difference. Employers who reasonably and in good faith try to comply with changed law will be less likely to face double damages. The decision clarifies when punitive double damages apply under the ADEA.

Dissents or concurrances

The opinion does not include a Supreme Court dissent; a dissenting judge below had criticized holding TWA liable despite its voluntary practice of employing older flight engineers.