« WI - State law age discrimination claim was barred by "ministerial exception" (4-3) | Main | 11th - No class certification for claimed failure to pay for all hours worked »
7th - Employee unable to show age discrimination during RIF
July 29, 2009 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
Martino v. MCI Communications (7th Cir 07/28/2009)
Martino sued his former employer claiming he was selected for termination during a reduction in force because he was nearing his 56th birthday. The trial court granted summary judgment for the employer; the 7th Circuit affirmed.
Originally hired by MCI at age 54, Martino was discharged as part of a reduction in force that followed MCI's merger with Verizon. Martino did not argue that there was evidence of age discrimination as to the ultimate decisionmaker or as to the manager who submitted his name as a RIF candidate. His claim was that his immediate supervisor harbored age animus. The 7th Circuit analyzed the case three ways.
(1) Martino claimed he had direct evidence of bias because his supervisor had referred to him as "oldtimer." Using the "cat's paw" theory, the court found that Martino's supervisor did not have "singular influence" over the decisionmaker, and that the decisionmaker (plus an intermediate recommender) conducted an independent and bias-free analysis.
(2) Using the indirect method of proof, the court found that Martino failed to establish two elements. (a) He did not establish that he was meeting the employer's expectations in that he was not a team player, and he had an "obsolete skill set" that would be of declining value as the employer shifted its focus to a different type of service. (b) He could not establish that the employer treated younger workers better. Although the employer retained some employees who were younger than 40, Martino uniquely had lost the confidence of the core sales team and stood out as poorly equipped for the employer's new focus.
(3) Martino could not show that, but for his age, he would not have been terminated, as is required under Gross v. FBL Financial (US Supreme Court 2009). At best he could do no more than show that his age possibly solidified the employer's decision.
EEOC | NLRB | Supreme Court | Employment Law Blog | Arbitration Blog | Employment Law 101
