The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a unanimous ruling that permits employees to prove job bias by showing that the employer’s stated reason for termination or other adverse action was false. This is an important decision, although how it will impact California employers isn’t yet clear.
Employee Fired For Mistakes
Roger Reeves, 57, worked for Sanderson Plumbing Products for 40 years and was responsible for recording employee attendance and hours. He was terminated when an audit allegedly revealed numerous time-keeping errors. Reeves sued for age discrimination. He argued that Sanderson Plumbing’s reason for firing him was a subterfuge because the evidence was clear that he had properly maintained the company’s attendance records. In particular, Reeves showed that the time clock often malfunctioned and that his supervisor was responsible for many of the problems blamed on him. He charged the real reason he was fired was his age, not his performance. A jury agreed and awarded him almost $100,000.
Join us this fall in San Francisco for the California Employment Law Update conference, a 3-day event that will teach you everything you need to know about new laws and regulations, and your compliance obligations, for the year ahead—it’s one-stop shopping at its best.
False Explanation Can Lead To Employee Win
Sanderson Plumbing appealed. It contended Reeves had to show specific evidence of age discrimination, not simply that the stated reason for his termination was untrue.But the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the jury award. The court said that when an employer gives a false excuse for firing an employee who is 40 or older, this in itself—without additional evidence of age bias—may justify the conclusion that discrimination was the most likely reason for discharge. The court pointed out, however, that an untrue explanation for a termination may not always support a finding of age bias if, for example, there is evidence of some other nondiscriminatory reason for the employer’s decision.
Age-Based Comments Strengthen Case
In Reeves’ case, he also presented other evidence of age discrimination that bolstered his position. The supervisor who terminated him allegedly told him he “was so old he must have come over on the Mayflower” and that he “was too damn old to do his job.” Plus, Reeves showed he was subjected to more exacting production standards than a younger co-worker.
Impact On California Employers
This decision is consistent with prior Ninth Circuit cases interpreting federal law as it applies to California employers. However, it’s currently an open question whether, under state law, simply proving an employer’s reasons are untrue can establish illegal age bias. A pending California Supreme Court case could resolve the issue and this U.S. Supreme Court decision may well affect its outcome.
Defensive Measures
The best defense against a job bias claim is to always have documentation that supports the legitimate, objective reasons for your decision. It is also critical to ensure that supervisors know the risks associated with making inappropriate remarks about a person’s age, gender, race or other protected status.