Targeted practices like those alleged in EEOC’s lawsuit may not only deprive an employer’s talent base of important skills — such as increased loyalty and the ability to establish customer networks, a report from Indeed points out — they may also be illegal under the ADEA.

The statute prohibits age discrimination in any aspect of employment, including hiring, an EEOC guidance explains. Also, employers may run afoul of the law (even if unintentionally) with neutral employment practices — those that apply to everyone regardless of age — if these practices have a negative impact on applicants or employees 40 or over, former EEOC Chair Victoria Lipnic noted in a 2018 statement marking the ADEA’s 50th anniversary.

For example, employers should watch for job ads that employ dog whistles for ageism. Certain code words, such as “fresh,” “tech savvy,” “digital native,” “flexible,” “energetic,” “active” and “high potential,” can signal age bias, the Indeed report said. During the screening process, employers may unintentionally promote ageism by rejecting applicants who lack a social media presence or have a college graduation date from more than 20 years ago, the report added.

Employers can still lawfully attract millennials, a Society for Human Resource Management post explained, suggesting recruiters emphasize what millennials find important, such as performance-based compensation, flexible schedules and locations, access to decision-makers and a clear area of responsibility. But there are caveats: Don’t promise what you don’t offer. Don’t generalize; not all members of a generation want the same thing. And don’t discourage older applicants, the post cautions.

Findings by AARP revealed another way older workers may be overlooked. In a 2020 survey, more than half of the 6,000 global employers who responded said they don’t include age in their diversity, equity and inclusion policies.

Read the full report here