Rack up a victory for our older workers.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that designing more generous benefit packages for older workers does not violate a federal age-discrimination law. It’s difficult to believe anyone ever thought that, but then you know how some of our impatient younger citizens think.

The court voted 6-3 in favor of General Dynamics Land Systems, which had faced a lawsuit from workers in their 40s. They claimed they were unfairly denied retiree health benefits that had been offered to older workers. In his majority opinion, Justice David Souter wrote that the 1967 law banning age discrimination “does not mean to stop an employer from favoring an older employee over a younger one.”

A number of experts had said a ruling in favor of the younger employees could have ended the practice of offering more generous benefit packages or early retirement plans to older workers. They also said it could have eventually led to more reverse age-discrimination cases from workers in their 20s and 30s.

To their credit, most employers tend to give better benefits to people who have been with them longer and who are getting up in years. Why not? Such people have contributed far more to the success or progress of a company than later hires with fewer years on the job. Why shouldn’t they earn their benefits the same way the older workers did?

Mark Biggerman, the lawyer representing the younger workers in the case, said the ruling could have a long-term impact by prompting companies to cut younger workers’ health benefits. Workers at General Dynamics had lost benefits under a union agreement.

Other legal experts say a ruling barring more generous packages to older workers could have led companies to cut benefits across the board. That would penalize the older people.

“If the court had ruled the other way there would have been a huge number of lawsuits against companies,” said Lisa Berg, a Miami employment lawyer. “Employers can feel safe.”

Reverse age-bias claims can still be filed under state laws that do not stipulate age, she added.

There remain many avenues for workers of all ages to pursue in the case of benefits. It makes sense, however, that people in their 50s and 60s with long service to a company should have accrued better benefits than people in their 20s, 30s and 40s with far shorter terms of service.