Most HR professionals and lawyers know the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) bars refusing to hire someone because of age. But what about hiring policies that look neutral on their face, like experience caps or “recent graduate” preferences, that end up screening out older candidates? Courts have not agreed on whether the ADEA lets applicants challenge those practices. Congress is now stepping in with a bill to make the answer clear.
TL;DR: The Protect Older Job Applicants Act of 2025 would amend the ADEA to make clear that job applicants are protected against policies or practices that disproportionately disadvantage older workers. This comes after years of split court decisions on whether outside applicants can bring disparate impact claims under the ADEA. Read the press release here.
Wait — Applicants Aren’t Always Covered?
The ADEA already bans refusing to hire someone because of age (disparate treatment). But whether job applicants can sue over neutral hiring criteria that disproportionately exclude older candidates (disparate impact) has been contested for years.
How the Courts Split on Disparate Impact
Courts are divided over whether older job applicants can challenge neutral hiring practices (i.e. disparate impact), and your exposure depends partly on location:
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that job applicants cannot bring disparate impact claims under the ADEA.
-
The Seventh Circuit reached the same conclusion.
-
A federal court in Delaware recently followed this reasoning and dismissed claims from applicants challenging “recent graduate” postings.
-
By contrast, a federal court in California allowed an applicant’s disparate impact claim to proceed.
Because the Supreme Court has not stepped in, employers face different rules depending on jurisdiction. For employers, the takeaway is simple: until Congress acts, hiring criteria that look fine in one place may trigger claims in another, and state law could change the analysis even further.
What the Protect Older Job Applicants Act Would Change
The Protect Older Job Applicants Act of 2025, a bipartisan measure introduced last week, would update the law so that job applicants are clearly protected from age bias in hiring practices, including disparate impact, not just people who already work for an employer.
It also requires the EEOC to look back at claims of age discrimination in hiring since 2015 and publish a report with recommendations on how employers can avoid age bias in their recruiting and screening.
Why HR and Counsel Should Care Now
If enacted, the POJA Act would open the door to more claims and more EEOC oversight. Employers would need to rethink applicant-screening tools, including AI-driven recruiting, with age bias in mind.
Steps to Take Before the Law Catches Up
-
Audit hiring criteria. Watch out for “experience caps,” “early career” phrasing, or other requirements that could disproportionately screen out older applicants.
-
Review technology and AI tools. Many applicant-tracking systems and AI-driven recruiting platforms may unintentionally disadvantage older candidates. Test these systems for age bias and adjust as needed.
-
Broaden recruiting pipelines. Avoid over-reliance on channels that skew young, like campus-only hiring.
-
Document business justifications. Be ready to defend any requirement that could disproportionately impact older applicants.
-
Monitor EEOC signals. The forthcoming study may shape enforcement even before the bill passes.
Conclusion
Right now, employers face a patchwork of rules. In some jurisdictions, older applicants cannot challenge neutral hiring practices. In others, they can. State laws add yet another layer of complexity.
The Protect Older Job Applicants Act of 2025 would cut through that uncertainty by creating one nationwide standard: job applicants would be clearly protected from age bias in hiring, including disparate impact. For HR and in-house counsel, that means it is time to start reviewing hiring criteria now, before the law changes.