Waiving the right to sue is intentionally giving up the right to sue. It’s saying to an employer in this regard that the employer is not accountable for his/her acts. Waivers are sometimes unavoidable, unless you choose to omit the occasion. That is that you may not get hired if you choose not to sign. So in such case, you may sign the waiver as a formality, or under pressure. Often there are flaws connected with the waiver, such as incorrect or even illegal or hidden wording.

So will I sue in the case 10.3, “Yes” I will: because it qualifies as an unjust dismissal. Mr. David Parker was terminated because of his age and not because of his performance, which violates the contractual rights when promised secured employment. Further, every implied contract is assumed to have agreement of good faith and fair dealings. The implied contract of employment is whereby an employee with a long service record, promises of future employment, retirement and profit-sharing programs, and the like, mean that employees are "at will" and can be fired at any time, for no reason at all. None of the other factors are essential but the length of service and loss of wages are the most significant. It makes sense that the longer you've been with a company, the more reasonable it is to expect that it will continue to employ you. Since Mr. Parker has been will the company for a long time, he has an implied contract and is protected by it.

Even if Mr. David Parker was fired as a result of reducing company cost of operation and to increase future revenue; but since he was earning more a lot due to his experience and longevity there, his firing is still unjustified due to the fact that revenues can be increased using other avenues like increased advertising or improvement in product/service quality. In addition, Mr. Parker is harmed because new jobs are scare and alternatives are undesirable. Hence, the loss is a significant financial blow not only to him but the society as a whole.

In an age discrimination case, the employee can sue for emotional distress and punitive damages. Such cases are subjective, and are really up to the jury. Here, the jurors' emotions are the most important factor. Sympathy is important to jurors. If a juror can see him/herself in the same position as the person suing, then he/she is more likely to award higher damages. With age discrimination: everyone hopes or expects to grow old. In some respect, all jurors can see themselves in the place of the older worker who claims discrimination. While this theory is difficult to prove, and its effect difficult to quantify, it stands to reason that it to some extent accounts for the large size of jury verdicts in age discrimination cases.

Further more, even if Mr. Parker doesn't have a claim for age discrimination, there might still be another form of claim. For example, if the employee did have an implied contract, and was fired without cause, then he can still sue for past and future lost wages and benefits. However, the employee can't sue for emotional distress or punitive damages. Likewise, The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) makes it unlawful for an employer "to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age."

References:
Boatright, John R. (2003). “Ethics and The Conduct of Business.” Upper Saddle River:
                  Prentice Hall

Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA): http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/adea.html