the ADEA prohibit employers from discriminating with respect to “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l), 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1). “[A] materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of employment” is considered an adverse employment action. Torres v. Pisano, 116 F.3d 625, 640 (2d Cir.1997) (internal quotes omitted); see also, de la Cruz v. N.Y. City Human Res. Admin. Dep’t of Soc. Serv., 82 F.3d 16, 21 (2d Cir.1996). An action “injurious to current employment or the ability to secure future employment” is an adverse employment action. Wanamaker v. Columbian Rope Co., 108 F.3d 462, 466 (2d Cir.1997). The Second Circuit has held that a downgrade in evaluation is an adverse employment action. See Morris v. Lindau, 196 F.3d 102, 110 (2d Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Dominic v. Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.,
holding that a negative performance evaluation on its own is insufficient to constitute an adverse employment action as a matter of law holding that a negative criticism or performance evaluation unaccompanied by a materially adverse change in the terms or conditions of employment does not constitute adverse employment action recognizing retaliation involving promotion as adverse employment actions under the first amendment holding in the context of a first amendment retaliation claim that adverse employment actions may include negative evaluation letters holding that lesser actions than discharge refusal to hire refusal to promote demotion reduction in pay and reprimand may also be considered adverse employment actions in the first amendment retaliation context