The U.S. population is aging as health care improves, the older generation is living longer and still working or just entering the workforce work. One of the biggest problems these older people face is age discrimination in the workplace. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 prohibits employment discrimination based on age. Through a detailed explanation and history of the law, this article will examine how the ADEA affects workplace professionals, human resources, managers, and employers in the workplace. It will further examine how the employee is affected by the ADEA. This includes what their rights are and how they can file a complaint. Finally, a legal case will be reviewed and evaluated so that the application of the law can be demonstrated.Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967HistoryThe origins of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act The 1967 employment law dates back to the time the U.S. government adopted Title VII. of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act radically changed professional life in the United States. It was created to combat arbitrary discrimination in the workplace based on age. Three years later, in 1967, Congress passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) to protect workers ages 40 to 65. The passage of this law followed findings mandated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that many employers harbor incorrect and stigmatizing stereotypes about older workers that diminish their ability to find and maintain employment (Sharp , R., 2010). The main concern for policymakers was blatant age discrimination in hiring, as about half of all private job postings explicitly banned applicants over 55 and a quarter excluded those over 55 years old. -vol4-part1627.xml#seqnum1627.1Lindemann, BT and Kadue, DD (2003). Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Retrieved from http://www.answers.com/topic/age-discrimination-in-employment-actSharp, R. (November 24, 2010). Age discrimination. Retrieved from http://lawhighereducation.org/10-age-discrimination.htmlUnited States District Court – District of Hawaii (2012). Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hawaii HealthCare Professionals, Inc., aka Hawaii Professional HomeCare Services, Inc., and Carolyn Frutoz-de Harne, aka Carolyn Frutoz, Case No. 1:10-cv-00549 -ACK-BMK (Document 51). Retrieved from the United States Government Printing Offices website: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-hid-1_10-cv-00549/pdf/USCOURTS-hid-1_10-cv-00549-0 .pdfWalsh, DJ (2013). Labor law for human resources practice. (4th ed.). Mason, OH: Southwest CENGAGE Learning.