AARP v. EEOC

Case Updates

Click here to view the opinion.

The D.C. District Court upheld the incentives for participation in wellness programs specified in the EEOC’s recently issued wellness regulations and rejected the AARP’s challenge requesting a preliminary injunction based on the argument that these incentives were inherently coercive.

The U.S. Chamber urged the D.C. District Court to deny the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction in a case addressing the use of incentive in employer wellness programs.

The Chamber believes that EEOC’s regulations are in many ways too restrictive of wellness programs. However, the Chamber’s brief focused on explaining how incentives in wellness programs are permissible under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and extremely important for the viability and success of wellness plans for the benefit of employers and employees.

Lawrence Z. Lorber, Edward V. Arnold, Camille A. Olson, and Benjamin J. Conley of Seyfarth Shaw LLP served as co-counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center in this case.