EEOC Sues Colorado Hospital Again Over Age Bias, Retaliation

Image source: MRH

A hospital in Colorado is once again facing serious accusations that it discriminated against older nurses. In late September 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a federal lawsuit against Montrose Regional Health (MRH), alleging age discrimination and retaliation. 

This is the second time in less than a decade that the hospital has been sued over age discrimination by nursing staff. 

What the EEOC Alleges

According to the EEOC, MRH “harassed and discriminated against older employees and retaliated against them when they complained.” The complaint focuses in particular on nurses in the Same Day Surgery / Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (SDS/PACU). 

The EEOC’s lawsuit cites several types of conduct:

• Managers, including the chief nursing officer, said in staff meetings they wanted “younger nurses take over,” and sought “more youthful and energetic” staff. 
• Older workers were accused of being “lazy” or unwilling to work hard. 
• Older nurses were subjected to closer scrutiny and supervision than younger counterparts. 
• When older nurses complained about age discrimination, MRH allegedly failed to address their reports and instead retaliated by firing multiple workers. 

The EEOC says that the conduct violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of age and retaliation for complaining about discrimination. 

Mary Jo O’Neill, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Phoenix District, said: “Older nurses come with significant expertise and are an essential part of any medical center’s workforce, and the EEOC is committed to fighting for the rights of all workers, including vulnerable older workers.” 

The new lawsuit is filed after EEOC’s prior attempt to reach resolution failed. 

Background: The Previous Lawsuit

This is not MRH’s first encounter with age discrimination claims. In 2016, the EEOC previously sued the health center, which resulted in a settlement. 

In the earlier case, Katherine Casias was singled out. Casias had been employed since 1985 and, according to the complaint, never received a below-average review or formal discipline. 

She alleged that supervisors demeaned her and younger nurses were favored. Among the statements attributed to supervisors: that younger nurses were “easier to train” and cheaper to employ; that supervisors wanted younger nurses who could “dance around the older nurses;” and that Casias was called an “old b***h.” Other older employees reportedly overheard a supervisor instructing staff to “work that old grey-haired b***h into the ground” until she quit or was fired. 

That case was resolved by a consent decree: MRH agreed to pay $400,000 and to conduct annual anti-discrimination training for three years. The settlement period ran through January 2021. 

In the 2025 lawsuit, the EEOC claims that MRH’s actions continued after the settlement period. 

MRH’s Statement and Defense

Montrose Regional Health strongly denies the accusations in the new lawsuit. In a statement to CBS Colorado, MRH said: “MRH received the EEOC charge in 2021 and we have fully cooperated with the investigation over the past four years. While we are disappointed in the recent decision, we want to state clearly that we deny the allegations made against us. We also participated in the conciliation process in good faith, seeking an amicable resolution, but found it difficult to engage meaningfully as the EEOC declined to provide us with essential information.” 

MRH also said it “complied with every aspect of the consent decree from December 2017 through January 2021,” including submitting reports, conducting quarterly trainings, reviewing policies, and reviewing disciplinary processes. 

They added: “Montrose Regional Health intends to vigorously defend against these claims. At the same time, MRH will work with the EEOC to better understand their concerns and provide any additional information needed… We adamantly deny any wrongdoing and remain confident in our employment practices, which comply fully with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and all applicable laws. Montrose Regional Health is committed to fostering a workplace where all employees are valued and supported.” 

What This Means for Nurses

• Age discrimination is illegal after 40. Proving it often requires showing favoritism toward younger workers, biased remarks, or patterns of unfair treatment.
• Discrimination can be subtle. Increased scrutiny, comments about “youthful” staff, or retaliation after complaints may all signal age bias.
• Watch for retaliation. Reporting unfair treatment should never lead to firing or demotion. You should document every incident, email, and conversation.
• Know your rights. You can file with the EEOC, and retaliation itself may be grounds for a claim. Cases like MRH’s remind hospitals to value experienced nurses and prevent bias.

For nurses, the Montrose Regional Health case is a sharp reminder that age discrimination and retaliation still occur, even in professions where experience and maturity are vital. While MRH denies wrongdoing and intends to defend its practices, the EEOC’s decision to sue again suggests that regulators believe there is enough evidence to pursue enforcement.

If you are a nurse over 40 who is experiencing sudden negative changes in evaluation, increased scrutiny, push to resign, or retaliation after complaining, you owe it to yourself to document everything thoroughly, seek counsel, and investigate your rights.

 

🤔 What do you think about this lawsuit? Let us know in the discussion forum below.