- Available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
- - SE HABLA ESPAÑOL
- Available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
- - SE HABLA ESPAÑOL
Mercer Legal Group represents Los Angeles and California employees age 40 and over in age discrimination claims under FEHA and the ADEA. Patterns we see most often: a layoff that lands almost entirely on older workers, a younger replacement, or a sudden negative review after years of strong performance.
Mercer Legal Group reviews employment law claims carefully, explains available options, and pursues appropriate remedies when the facts and law support them. Every case is different, and no attorney can guarantee a specific result.
Where the facts support an age discrimination claim, available remedies may include:
Every case is different, and no attorney can guarantee a specific outcome.
Our California age discrimination attorneys read the facts, identify whether the layoff pattern or replacement structure supports a claim, and pursue available remedies when the facts support them. From the first call you talk to a senior attorney. Cases are handled on a contingency-fee basis.
Age cases are usually proved by pattern, not by a single comment. Below are the questions clients ask us most.
California gives age discrimination plaintiffs a wider lane than federal law. Under FEHA, California courts allow employees to prove age discrimination through circumstantial evidence — pattern, comparators, pretext, statistical disparity, and timing. You do not need a direct age comment to prove a case. What you typically need is a comparator record showing similarly situated younger coworkers were treated differently for the same conduct. Most Los Angeles juries respond more strongly to comparator + pretext evidence than to a single age remark.
Yes. A layoff that disproportionately falls on California employees 40 and over — or that retains younger workers with weaker performance — can support an age discrimination claim under FEHA and the ADEA. California courts treat the employer’s choice of who to lay off as itself evidence. Los Angeles is a heavy media, tech, and entertainment hub where “we need fresh energy” restructurings often surface, and these patterns can be examined against the actual layoff demographics.
Often yes. California courts look closely at “elimination” claims when a similar role reappears under a different title shortly after the termination. The substance of the work matters more than the job title. In Los Angeles employment cases, plaintiffs frequently uncover the “reorganized” role through LinkedIn updates, job postings, or coworker testimony. If the new hire’s actual duties overlap with the eliminated employee’s prior work, that is strong pretext evidence under FEHA.
Maybe not. Federal and California law require specific disclosures before an age waiver is enforceable — a 21-day review period for individual cases, 45 days for group layoffs, and a 7-day revocation window after signing. California’s OWBPA-equivalent rules add disclosure requirements specific to California employees. Many California employer severance releases fail one or more of these requirements, making the waiver unenforceable. Always have a California employment attorney review the release before assuming the claim is lost.
For FEHA claims, California gives you three years from the discriminatory act to file with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD), followed by one year after the right-to-sue notice. That is the broader filing window. Federal ADEA claims have much shorter EEOC deadlines — often 300 days in California (California is a “deferral” state with its own FEHA agency). For Los Angeles-area employees, the CRD has offices that accept FEHA filings, and an attorney can help calculate which deadlines actually apply to your situation.
If you were laid off in a pattern that targeted older workers, replaced by someone younger, denied promotions, or pushed toward early retirement, contact Mercer Legal Group for a free, confidential case review. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship.
