ADEA plaintiff wins
Jones v. Oklahoma City Public Schools, a Tenth Circuit opinion, is an important read for practitioners handling ADEA claims. The plaintiff had been employed since 1969 and had risen in the system to an executive position. In 20007 a new superintendent eliminated the position plaintiff held, but renamed it and filled it with a younger worker. More after the jump
Plaintiff was reassigned as a principal of an elementary school with an immediate reduction of vacation benefits and a diminution of retirement benefits. A year later her salary was reduced by $17,000. Plaintiff sued, and the trial court granted the employer summary judgment despite the evidence of age related comments about the plaintiff, because Plaintiff failed to show any additional evidence that age played a role in the decision.The Tenth Circuit addressed many issues the first of which was the "but for" causation standard set out in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. The Tenth Circuit held the "but for"standard does ‘not require [plaintiffs] to show that age was the sole motivating factor in the employment decision.’ (Citations omitted). Instead, an employer may be held liable under the ADEA if other factors contributed to its taking an adverse action, as long as ‘age was the factor that made a difference.’
Second, the Court found the McDonnell Douglas framework applied, and that circumstantial evidence may prove discrimination. The Court also rejected the curious argument the actions taken against the plaintiff we not adverse, finding the pension and vacation issues sufficient as well as the immediate loss of $5 a day in pay and the subsequent loss to $17,000 a year to be sufficiently adverse.
The Court found pretext alone can be sufficient proof of discrimination, rejecting the Defendant's pretext plus argumnet.Defendant's position that pretext alone cannot establish discrimination.
This entry was posted on at 6:05 AM and is filed under ADEA, but for causation, Gross v. FBL Financial Services, McDonnell Dougless, Oklahoma City, pretext plus, Tenth Circuit. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response.
- No comments yet.
VIP Followers
Info recommended by:
Webpages of law
Popular entries
-
500 Coke employees lost their health insurance the day after they went on strike. The union has sued under ERISA , claiming the action wa...
-
(BY HUGO) Since the beginning of May, the flow of an emissary of Lake Champlain, the Richelieu River, is near or at record level, and a larg...
-
(BY HUGO) On 27 April, the Québec Ministry for Sustainable development, Environment and Parks presented a regulation project on pricing of ...
-
(BY HUGO) Just a quick post to follow up on reports relating to shale gas leaks from wells in Québec. The Québec Ministry for Natural Resour...
-
Well kids it's the end of another work week (unless you are working all weekend or don't have a job at all), so I'm flying the c...
-
(BY HUGO) Les Cahiers de droit just published their issue 3 & 4, Vol. 51, a special issue on water law with many articles exploring int...
-
You know, I find it more than a little annoying that Scott Rothstein has stolen my 3d DCA "bunker" imagery. It's mine, dammit!...
-
Well kids I plan to scoot out of here shortly, to begin my long solemn weekend regimen of prayer , reflection , and expanding my abdomen , s...
-
Former CFO for R. Allen Stanford, Jim Davis, pleaded guilty to fraud yesterday . This is probably not good news for Proskauer's Tom Sjob...
-
Billy Shields has a nice piece on the never-ending saga involving BDO Seidman and the new trial that commenced this week against BDO Intern...