Powerful words – COO’s statements leave employer in the legal lurch

Description

Abstract: When a 71-year-old security guard was laid off from his job at the retirement home he lived in, he filed an age discrimination suit. The COO claimed that he’d decided to eliminate the resident employee program to save costs and assure a better trained workforce. The district court granted summary judgment, and the plaintiff appealed, stating that the court had erred in doing so before he had any opportunity to conduct discovery. The appellate court agreed, holding that the plaintiff had offered direct evidence of discriminatory intent and so was entitled to a trial. This article notes that part of that evidence was the COO’s earlier statements to the EEOC that suggested a discriminatory attitude. Wilson v. Cox, No. 12-5070, June 3, 2014 (D.C. Cir.)