Feds sue Cedar Point over employee housing age policy

When I first heard about it a year or so ago, I was confused as to why this policy was put into effect. I liked the older employees that I got to work with when I was there a decade or so ago. They were obviously more mature, but also more respectful and trustworthy.

I know that sex crimes in employee housing is being reported more often lately. Was that the reason?

But it really is age discrimination. I think the creeps would get weeded out pretty easily no matter what their age was.

I seem to recall that a lot of the artisans on the Frontier Trail were at least that old, and stayed in the apartments that where in the front wing of the Cedars (where George Roos had an apartment.). Perhaps this policy went into effect after they tore down the Cedars?

They “let me in” The Cedars a couple weeks shy of 18. But then they also worked us open to close with no lunch on occasion. This was the early 90s. Times gotta change. Was good for character I guess.

I remember the Cedars when older employees and full time managers had places in that first building over the post office. I always assumed it was because they preferred not to co-habitate with the rowdy kids and were given that slight preferential treatment. Some also lived in the Breakers rotunda. None of them were nice.
That things changed after Cedars was razed is probably true. And this time it’s probably more like the kids not wanting to live in cramped quarters with Gramps. Not only would they consider it creepy but it might considerably cramp their style.
I seem to recall the last time this topic came up there were Halloweekend residents that reported older screamster-types living in the dorms.

Offering a benefit based on age to employees seems to be 100% age discrimination

Did Cedar Fair’s legal counsel think this was a great idea, because oh boy! This was a suit waiting to happen.

I never really cared for this policy to start with, especially when the park is constantly having trouble staffing the place properly. I don't know the law well enough to know how this will shake out.

I don't think the EEOC would pursue it if they weren't certain they had a case. I doubt it goes to court.

I can't imagine it would be that hard to use technology to create certain restricted areas of housing, if that was deemed necessary.

When I worked at Camp Snoopy a hundred years ago, the rule was, and probably still is, that if you are not a blue tag (which indicates that they are underage), you can not socialize with anyone who is a blue tag. Very agreeable rule. I remember cutting conversations with blue tags short. Didn't want to be rude, but also... very agreeable rule.

Somewhat related story. I've never had a chance to tell it here...

I recall a 30ish-year-old dude working at the Woodstock Express photo booth who was dating, as he called it, a fourteen-year-old boy who worked in nearby games. One evening, "Someone" walked into the Cedar Point police station to speak with the chief in his office upstairs, the dude was arrested the next morning and taken away in handcuffs. Dude was never heard from again.

Maybe they'll make a different color tag of the over-40 geriatric employees. I wonder if they would have a rule that anyone over 40 are not allowed to socialize with anyone under 40? LOL

When I did the Disney College Program back in the day there were a few non traditional students mixed in the apartments with everyone else. The only way they divided things was under 21 and over 21. Which means you would have the occasional person their 30s, 40s or even 50s living with a group of 21-23 year olds. I was 22 when I did the program and would have been a bit weirded out if they had paired me with, let's say, a 37 year old. Now at 37, I can think of few things I would rather do less than live with 22 year olds in Disney College Program housing. And the fact that a 22 year old has (or at least at that time had) no guarantee they won't be paired up in a large age gap situation is, let's say, suboptimal.

I see the point of this. But I feel like it's completely reasonable to have an age cutoff in the main areas of housing and then have an area specifically for, let's say, 30+

Between this and the police department debacle it does seem like CF doesn't particularly care about the law.

39 was ok for CP employee housing...but not 41? I guess that is where things get a little weird...and I suspect is a key to the case itself.

I don't recall any "older" folks living at Vista Way when I was on the College Program...but at 53 (now) I would not have wanted to live with the 23 year old version of myself and my roommates.

Even if there were good intentions behind implementing a cut off age for housing it is clearly age discrimination. Just house your more "mature" employees in a different area than the college age kiddos. I wouldn't want to bunk with college kids and I'm sure they don't want to bunk with me but that doesn't make it right that I could not pay for housing from the park if i worked there for a summer just because I'm 51.