Can employer consider the larger benefits provided under a plan to older employees when negotiating salary? Age discrimination?

[WDIK]

For an employer that sponsors a defined benefit plan (or another plan where age plays a factor in allocations):

Is it reasonable for the employer to consider the larger benefits provided under the plan to older employees when negotiating salary or would this be considered age-discrimination?

Would the answer depend on the similarity in job positions between two individuals? In other words, two employees with the same job decription would receive different salary amounts if their ages were substantially different.

Is the situation different when considering existing employees versus potential employees?

Would the scenario change if it is an existing retirement plan as opposed to a potential plan?

Thanks for your opinions and insight.

[WDIK]

There have been no posts on this topic because:

A) The answer is so obvious that no response is required.

B) The topic is too controversial.

C) There is no correct response.

D) There are an infinite number of correct responses.

E) These message boards discriminate against pseudo-acronym usernames.

F) Too much L-Tryptophan from Thanksgiving.

G) Clerical oversight.

H) Paranoia.

I) Economic downturn.

J) Right-wing conspiracy.

K) Bad-hair day.

L) Apathy.

M) Technological glitch.

O) Limited time (as compared to someone providing multiple choice reponses).

P) Political pressure.

Q) Peer Pressure.

R) Litigation.

S) HIPAA requirements.

T) OSHA requirements.

U) Plague.

V) Cosmological forces.

W) All of the above.

X) None of the above.

Y) Some other combination of the above.

Z) Other.

[Effen]

A, C, but then again wdik...

Can't an employer (outside a bargaining agreement) pay employees what ever he wants? If they don't like it, they can vote with their feet.

If Sally is prettier than Sarah, doesn't Sally often get paid more? If Ted has more testosterone than Sally, doesn't Ted get paid more? If Bill has negatives of the boss and Sarah, doesn't Bill get paid more?

Could it be age discrimination.... sure! Does it happen every day.... sure!

The same argument is often made with health insurance. If Sally is covered under her husband’s policy, she might make a little more than Sarah whose nine illegitimate kids are covered under the company policy.

I think it's much more prevalent in smaller employers. Larger employers have too much to loose.

If the client is concerned, they should discuss it with their attorney. As far as I know, we still don't have client/actuary privileges in court.

[mbozek]

Answer Z: Other. Question requires expertise in age discrimination under federal and state law. This question should be referred to counsel who will want to get paid for the answer.

[WDIK]

AA) Because the topic title was ambiguous.

(Thanks to whomever rewrote the title.)

[AndyH]

I think you got two very good responses. Is it/should it be considered in a small employer setting? I think so. Is it legal? See mbozek's comments.

I've always wondered what that blurb in most documents that says "The plan does not affect employment" was intended to cover.

[WDIK]

Thanks for the candid comments, intelligent insights, and appropriate advice.