A Common Pretextual Reason For Firing Employees: The Phantom Employee Or Customer Complaint
Through their decades of experience litigating wrongful termination cases, our wrongful termination lawyers in Citrus County, Florida know that employers mask their discriminatory motive by proffering pretextual reasons for firing employees. To prove their case in the employment discrimination context, employees must establish that the proffered reason for their termination is a pretext. As defined by the court in Millbrook v. IBP, Inc., 280 F.3d 1169 (7th Cir. 2002), “pretext” means “a lie” or “a phony reason for some action.” “Resort to a pretextual explanation is,” as the court in Binder v. Long Island Lighting Co., 57 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 1995) observed, “like flight from the scene of a crime, evidence indicating consciousness of guilt, which is, of course, evidence of illegal conduct.”
Courts have determined, such as the court in Chuang v. University of California Davis, 225 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2000), that pretext may be established in one of two ways: “(1) indirectly, by showing that the employer’s proffered explanation is unworthy of credence because it is internally inconsistent or otherwise not believable, or (2) directly, by showing that unlawful discrimination more likely motivated the employer.” In other words, pretext may be established, as the court in Smith v. Legget Wire Co., 220 F.3d 752 (6th Cir. 2000) determined, “by showing (1) that the proffered reason had no basis in fact, (2) that the proffered reason did not actually motivate the termination, or (3) that the proffered reason was not sufficient to motivate the discharge.” Pretext may also be established, as pointed out by the court in Anderson v. Coors Brewing Co., 181 F.3d 1171 (10th Cir. 1999), by showing “such weaknesses, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherencies, or contradictions in the employer’s proffered legitimate reasons for its action that a reasonable [jury] could rationally find them unworthy of credence and hence infer that the employer did not act for the asserted non-discriminatory reasons.”
In this article, our wrongful termination lawyers in Citrus County, Florida explain how the alleged facts in Vancour v. Bozzuto’s, Inc., 2006 WL 758636 (D. Conn. March 23, 2006) are illustrative of how employees fired because of alleged employee or customer complaints may establish that the proffered reason for their termination is unworthy of credence and, thus, pretextual.
Age Discrimination Lawsuit
In that case, a man named Vancour brought an age discrimination lawsuit against his former employer, Bozzuto’s, Inc. (“Bozzuto’s”), pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). The ADEA prohibits employers from discriminating against employees because of their age. Vancour claims that he was fired because of his age in violation of the ADEA.
In 1989, when he was fifty years old, Vancour was hired by Bozzuto’s as Director Meat Operations. In 1998, when he was fifty-eight years old, Vancour was given the title of Vice President of Meat, Deli, and Bakery at Bozzuto’s. In April 2003, Bozzuto’s Executive Vice President and Director of Human Resources told Vancour that he was being terminated because of “issues with customers, vendors, and [Bozzuto’s] personnel.” Vancour also met with Bozzuto’s President who gave him the same reasons for termination. During the litigation, Bozzuto’s also claimed that Vancour was fired because of complaints received by the President and Executive Vice President from customers and employees about Vancour.
In Vancour’s last performance evaluation, in May 2002, the Executive Vice President gave Vancour a “highly satisfactory” overall performance evaluation. In late 2002 or early 2023, according to Vancour, the Executive Vice President said to him: “You must be getting old. You used to be more demanding.”
Complaints Not Documented
Bozzuto’s filed a motion with the trial court seeking dismissal of Vancour’s age discrimination claim. In moving for dismissal of the case, Bozzuto’s contended that the evidence established that Vancour was fired for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons. The trial court disagreed and ruled that Vancour had presented sufficient evidence to establish that he was fired because of his age in violation of the ADEA to warrant a jury trial.
In denying Bozzuto’s motion for dismissal, the trial court determined that a jury could find that Bozzuto’s proffered reason that Vancour was fired because of complaints from customers and employees was “a pretext for discrimination.” In support of its conclusion, the trial court observed that “none of the purported complaints of employees and customers about Vancour are documented,” and that the President “could not remember with any specificity either the identities of the complainants or the substance of the complaints.” The trial court also pointed out that Vancour was given a “highly satisfactory” overall performance rating in his final performance review, suggesting that the alleged complaints from customers and employees were “insufficient to justify a low performance rating, let alone termination.”
Free Consult For Wrongful Discharge Victims
One of the most critical decisions wrongful termination victims must make is which wrongful termination lawyers to consult regarding their employee rights. As part of our commitment to helping wrongful termination victims, an experienced wrongful termination lawyer will speak with you personally and you will receive the individualized attention your case deserves. We offer free confidential case evaluations for employees, and you will not have to pay to speak with our wrongful termination lawyers regarding your employee rights. We are available for consultation at your convenience, including scheduling telephone consultations for evenings and weekends.
Citrus County Wrongful Termination Lawyers
Based in Ocala, Florida and representing workers throughout Florida, our wrongful termination lawyers in Citrus County, Florida have fought for the rights of wrongful termination victims for more than two decades. If you have been wrongfully fired or have questions about your rights as a wrongful termination victim, please contact our office for a free consultation with our wrongful termination lawyers in Citrus County, Florida. Our employee rights law firm takes wrongful termination cases on a contingency fee basis. This means that there are no attorney’s fees incurred unless there is a recovery, and our attorney’s fees come solely from the monetary award that you recover.