Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Hazen Paper: Pension Status Is Not Automatically a Proxy for Age Under the ADEA

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published May 19, 2026

Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins reviewed an ADEA verdict after a 62-year-old employee was discharged only weeks before his pension would have vested based on years of service.

Disparate treatment requires age motivation

The protected trait itself must actually play a role in the decision; an action can be unfair or unlawful for another reason without being age discrimination.

Years of service and age are distinct

The two often correlate, but an employer’s focus on service-based vesting does not automatically establish reliance on stereotypes about older workers.

Proxy evidence can still matter

Pension status may support an ADEA inference if the employer uses it as a practical stand-in for age or the surrounding evidence shows age was determinative.

Willfulness follows its own standard

Liquidated damages turn on knowledge or reckless disregard of the ADEA, and do not require an additional showing of outrageous conduct.

Key takeaways

• Identify the precise factor the decisionmaker actually used.
• Separate age, tenure, salary, and pension status in the evidence.
• Test whether a correlated factor served as a proxy for age.
• Evaluate ERISA and contract theories independently from the ADEA claim.