A California-based moving company is facing a job discrimination lawsuit that may prove debilitating.  Despite former efforts to reach a settlement, in which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sought $5 million, and Meathead Movers offered $750,000, the EEOC has announced its progression of a lawsuit against the company.  In its claim, the EEOC alleges that since 2017, Meathead Movers intentionally only hired younger employees and established an exclusive roster of strong athlete-type workers under the age of 40.  The company has countered these claims with an equally strong argument.

According to Aaron Steed, the owner of Meathead Movers, the company is open to recruiting and employing individuals of all ages who fit the criteria of the job description.  Ensuring that the movers and packers are physically capable of completing duties in an efficient, timely manner is integral to the success of the company.  While Steed understands the need to include a range of employees, he argues that certain people may not be physically strong enough to do the job.  While evolving to meet EEOC standards and laws is essential, Steed also does not want to go out of business. 

Although Steed’s argument is relatively fair, the branding and marketing practices produced by the company paint a conflicting picture.  In terms of the willingness to employ inclusively, the slogan “student-athlete movers” may naturally portray an image that the company only encourages student-aged applicants.  The EEOC aims to eliminate instances of unfair business practices, such as those that deny employment to older workers that greatly contribute to the economy, and fights for those who can perform physical job duties at any age.  This lawsuit raises questions and influences the debate on whether company owners and operators are within their rights to set specific parameters or qualifications, even if the resulting staff generates one limited type of employee.