A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Can employers use social media for employment discrimination?

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

You send in your resume and cover letter for a position you know you are qualified for. Your cover letter looks great and all the formatting is perfect – everything about it is perfect. Yet you don’t get an interview. Why?

If you are getting up there in years, could it be age discrimination? Many people would dismiss this notion out of hand because you didn’t put your age on the resume anywhere and how would they know? Social media.

How Are Employers Doing This?

It is quite simple. They look into your various social media accounts: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, etc. By looking through the various posts it is pretty simple to glean some basic information about you, your age in particular. According to ProPublica, this is not an uncommon occurrence.

What Can You Do About It?

The difficulty of an age discrimination claim of this kind is finding proof. How can we possibly prove that your prospective employer used social media to discriminate against you based on your age?

However, although this is a difficult endeavor, it is not impossible. The best thing to do is talk to an attorney who focuses on handling complicated employment law cases like this. Whether or not you have a winning claim would have to be a individualized decision, since so much would depend on the specific facts of your case.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.