Is it (ever) OK to discriminate based on age? And what counts as discrimination, in the relevant sense? The item below is about a court case that dealt with internet dating site Tinder’s handling of the issue. In particular, it was about charging more to customers over 30&dmash;or, as the company prefers to think of it, charging less to customers under 30. It is worth remembering, as you read it, that lots of companies, in lots of places discriminate against people under 55, by charging them more (i.e., they offer discounts for those 55 and older.)
>>>
LINK: Appeals court rules that Tinder’s pricing violates age discrimination laws (by Anthony Ha for Tech Crunch)
A California appeals court has sided with Allan Candelore, a man suing Tinder over the pricing for its premium service, Tinder Plus.
Specifically, Candelore and his lawyers argued that by charging $9.99 per month if a user is under 30, versus $19.99 per month if you’re 30 or older, Tinder is discriminating based on age, in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Unfair Competition Law (those are both California laws).
Tinder co-founder Sean Rad defended the pricing at TechCrunch’s Disrupt conference back in 2015 by saying, “Our intent is to provide a discount for our younger users….”
What do you think?
Brought to you by:
Business Ethics Highlights 
Recent Comments