Employee Discrimination Cases
ADEA prohibits employers from discriminating against employee due to their age (Cavico & Mujtaba, 2011). This includes but is not limited to discrimination in hiring, termination, and salary. Oftentimes age discrimination is not in the form of direct intentional actions. When an employee decides to pursue legal action the plaintiff has the burden of proving adverse action (Walsh, 2013). The director in this case has the requirement to prove prima facie in order to have a chance of winning this case. This first part is to prove that the former director is a member of a protected class of individuals. Any employee over the age of 40 years old is a protected under ADEA. The next thing the director has to prove is disparate treatment which is
…show more content…
The director refused to follow the instructions to discriminate against older applicant in the hiring process. Once her decision was made to refuse to cooperate, she was terminated for reasons Silver Oak changed over time. Employers are allowed to present legitimate reason for terminating an employee such as performance issues or changes in business needs. The director’s case hinges on the timing of the action. She was terminated while on medical leave after she refuse to discriminate against older workers. After the former director has presented her side, the burden shifts to the employee to prove that these facts were not the only reason she was terminated. The fact the employer has conflicting reason for terminating the employee is not favorable to their defense. These conflicting reason makes me believe the employer is looking for a reason other that obvious discrimination to defend their actions. The reasons for her being terminated changed only after the director sued for discrimination.The statements by management and the directives to discriminate provide the pretext to establishing the case. These actions provide the motive to prove that age discrimination was the reason for the disparate treatment. If Silver Oak’s reason for terminating the former director was consistent even if it was wrong it should still be upheld by the courts. The reasons for termination do not have to reasonable however they cannot be discriminatory. Silver Oak also cannot provide any business bona fide exception for the reason they want to only hire younger workers. Bona fide business reasons are the exception to cases of
The director refused to follow the instructions to discriminate against older applicant in the hiring process. Once her decision was made to refuse to cooperate, she was terminated for reasons Silver Oak changed over time. Employers are allowed to present legitimate reason for terminating an employee such as performance issues or changes in business needs. The director’s case hinges on the timing of the action. She was terminated while on medical leave after she refuse to discriminate against older workers. After the former director has presented her side, the burden shifts to the employee to prove that these facts were not the only reason she was terminated. The fact the employer has conflicting reason for terminating the employee is not favorable to their defense. These conflicting reason makes me believe the employer is looking for a reason other that obvious discrimination to defend their actions. The reasons for her being terminated changed only after the director sued for discrimination.The statements by management and the directives to discriminate provide the pretext to establishing the case. These actions provide the motive to prove that age discrimination was the reason for the disparate treatment. If Silver Oak’s reason for terminating the former director was consistent even if it was wrong it should still be upheld by the courts. The reasons for termination do not have to reasonable however they cannot be discriminatory. Silver Oak also cannot provide any business bona fide exception for the reason they want to only hire younger workers. Bona fide business reasons are the exception to cases of