finding that, in absence of program for testing physical fitness, a mandatory retirement age of 55 was not a BFOQ
How later courts described this case
- finding that, in absence of program for testing physical fitness, a mandatory retirement age of 55 was not a BFOQ
- mandatory retirement age of 55 for state police officers not BFOQ when agency had no program for testing health and fitness of all officers
- ADEA violation found after court determined mandatory retirement at age 55 is not a BFOQ for state police
- age is not a bona fide occupational qualification for state police officers
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ENGEL, Chief Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Contrary to the conclusion of the majority, I agree with United States District Judge Bertelsman that the Kentucky State Police Department has adequately demonstrated a bona fide occupational qualification in this case.
In EEOC v. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, 859 F.2d 24 (6th Cir.1988), a companion case which we heard with this case, plaintiffs challenged the mandatory retirement age for Tennessee conservation officers. In that case, despite the fact that mandatory retirement would protect older conservation officers from the dangers of working alone and far from any assistance, I concurred in invalidating the mandatory retirement policy; the record there disclosed inconsistent application of the policy and revealed a lack of bona fides by the State of Tennessee.
This case, however, discloses no such lack of good faith by the Kentucky State Police. Accordingly, I would affirm for the reasons set forth in Judge Bertelsman’s district court opinion of December 17,1986.