Skip to main content

AARP v. United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

D.D.C.December 29, 2016No. Civil Action No. 16-2113 (JDB)Cited 12 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Bates
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court denied AARP's motion for a preliminary injunction against EEOC's new wellness program regulations, allowing the regulations to take effect on January 1, 2017. AARP failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its APA challenge.

What This Ruling Means

**AARP Loses Challenge to Workplace Wellness Program Rules** The AARP sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to stop new regulations about workplace wellness programs from taking effect. The advocacy group argued that these rules would allow employers to pressure workers into sharing personal health information by offering incentives or penalties related to participation in company wellness programs. AARP claimed the regulations violated federal law protecting workers' rights. The court sided with the EEOC and refused to block the new rules, which went into effect on January 1, 2017. The judge found that AARP couldn't prove their legal challenge would likely succeed. This meant employers could continue operating wellness programs under the new federal guidelines. **What This Means for Workers:** This ruling affects how your employer can run workplace wellness programs. Under these regulations, companies can offer incentives (like lower insurance premiums) or impose penalties to encourage participation in health screenings, biometric testing, or wellness activities. While you generally can't be forced to participate, there may be financial consequences for opting out. Workers should carefully review their company's wellness program policies to understand what personal health information they may need to share and what the costs of non-participation might be.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.