Last month, the Lucas County Court of Appeals affirmed an employer’s summary judgment on an age discrimination claim because the plaintiff employee could not show that he had been replaced, was treated less favorably or that his termination was pretextual when the employer had an honest belief supporting the reason for his termination. Hardy v. The Anderson's, Inc., 2022-Ohio-3357. The Court agreed that the plaintiff could show that he was minimally qualified for his position based on his prior experience and promotion even though he had a recent negative evaluation. However, the plaintiff could not show that he had been replaced when existing employees assumed his prior job duties in addition to their existing responsibilities. He also could not show that he was treated less favorably than a substantially younger employee when that employee was not similarly situated because he only lived a few hours/miles outside his sale district and had fully informed the manager of his living arrangements and had not tried to hide them, unlike the plaintiff who moved thousands of miles from Michigan to the Caribbean to be with his second wife. Finally, there was no dispute that the plaintiff had not been candid about his living arrangements with his manager and that the manager blamed his relocation for his poor job performance. Whether he lied or was merely evasive, whether or not it was necessary to spend a certain amount of time in the sales district meeting with customers, and whether or not he was required to have reported this time as vacation instead of collecting his regular salary, the Court had no trouble finding that no one else had engaged in similar behavior and it justified his termination. The Court also rejected the argument that the manager’s prior comment referring to him as a dinosaur could constitute direct evidence of or pretext for discrimination.
According to the Court’s opinion, to save his second
marriage, the plaintiff had relocated to his wife’s home country in the Caribbean
for extended periods of time without telling his new manager. While the
plaintiff’s initial performance evaluation in his new management position had
been favorable (while he had been living full-time in his sales district), his
second evaluation had been negative even before his new manager found out that
he had been spending most weeks in the Caribbean. The plaintiff admitted that he had not
submitted certain weekly report or learned a new computer system. The plaintiff alleged that his new manager
once referred to him as a dinosaur. When
his job performance suffered, the manager found out about his relocation, confronted
him and immediately terminated him. Following the termination, the manager assumed
his duties for a few months before restructuring the position and hiring a new
employee to perform parts of the duties in one region.
NOTICE: This summary is designed merely to inform and alert
you of recent legal developments. It does not constitute legal advice and does
not apply to any particular situation because different facts could lead to
different results. Information here can change or be amended without notice.
Readers should not act upon this information without legal advice. If you have
any questions about anything you have read, you should consult with or retain
an employment attorney.
