One of the most frequently asked questions in employment law counseling is “Can I terminate Employee X?” The better and more salient question is “For what reason(s) should I terminate Employee X?” Not all reasons are created equal. There is a perception that the more reasons provided the greater the strength of the employer’s defense. And it’s true. Each discrete reason proffered by the employer must be rebutted. So, the more, the better? No, says the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in a recent case, Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Incorporated. A case so rich in its parsing of the law of “legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons” that an entire law review article could be devoted to it. Nicole Burton was a “temporary employee” of Freescale Semiconductor, where she had been placed by a staffing agency, Manpower. The first two years of her employment in circuit board assembly were uneventful. She received neutral to positive employment reviews. But her fortunes changed in year three when she broke a so-called “wafer” - the board upon which microchips are seated during construction. The incident was reported and she was counseled by a Manpower supervisor. Burton subsequently inhaled fumes while on the job. A few weeks later she experienced chest pains and heart palpitations and visited the emergency room on two occasions. Burton came to believe that her symptoms were caused by her exposure to the fumes. She notified both Freescale and Manpower and then filed a workers’ compensation claim. About three weeks after her workers’ compensation claim, Burton’s manager, Bruce Akroyd, decided to terminate Burton. Burton had been caught using the Internet (an accusation which she disputed). Akroyd decided (and testified) that the incident was the “last straw.” The record, however, indicated that Akroyd was not aware of any other reasons for Burton’s termination at the time he actually made the decision. Burton was not immediately informed of Akroyd’s decision; instead, she would stay on for a few weeks to train a replacement. As the time for terminating Burton drew near, Manpower began asking for supporting documentation of Burton’s poor performance. Akroyd directed Burton’s supervisors to generate such documentation, and they did, cataloging Burton’s past shortcomings. Manpower resisted the termination because of the paltry “contemporaneous” documentation and the recency of Burton’s workers’ compensation claim. Freescale, nonetheless, insisted. Jerry Rivera, a supervisor at Manpower, was instructed to terminate Burton’s employment for “poor performance” and to inform her that it was based on four discrete incidents – two which occurred after Akroyd had made the decision to terminate Burton. Burton sued, claiming disability discrimination and workers’ compensation retaliation. In defending the case, Freescale and Manpower reached back into Burton’s work history to add to the list of Burton’s transgressions. Critical work assessments described in a two-year-old performance review and a subsequent review that indicated she had “snapped at a trainer” were now included among the broken wafer, along with the unauthorized use of the Internet and information in emails solicited near the time of her termination that reported that Burton had improperly leaned on workstations, failed to keep her nose covered, and failed to proactively complete tasks absent direction. A fully loaded arsenal of “legitimate, non-discriminatory” reasons, you say? Not quite held the Fifth Circuit, when reversing the summary judgment granted to Freescale and Manpower. The ultimate issue is the employer’s reasoning “at the moment” the questioned employment decision is made. A justification that could not have motivated the employer’s decision is not evidence. And with that sleight of hand, the “old and cold” complaints about Burton’s performance in stale performance reviews of years earlier and the post-termination-decision emails containing the litany of shortcomings were gone – each vanquished as irrelevant by the court. Now the employers were still left with two of the four incidents upon which they had originally relied: the broken wafer and the internet use. However, Burton had worked for an additional six months after the warning about the broken wafer, meaning, in the court’s mind, that it “clearly was not a sufficient justification for her termination” but rather a single substantiated shortcoming which left the door open for Burton to establish pretext. Burton and Manpower were not out of the ring yet: they still had the internet use. Burton had admitted that she did not dispute that her supervisor (mistakenly but honestly) believed that she was using the internet. But, alas, the memory of Akroyd – the decider – failed him during his deposition. First, he testified that he didn’t know if Burton’s internet use was one of the things that motivated his decision. Later, he testified that he learned of it the day he made his decision from Alvarez, Burton’s supervisor, and that it was indeed the “final straw.” However, Alvarez testified that she never talked to Akroyd about Burton’s performance. Alvarez tried to “clarify” her testimony later, saying that she did recommend Burton’s termination but “slightly before” the date of the internet-use incident. Where the district court had attempted to “reconcile” Alvarez and Akroyd’s testimony as “clarifying” as opposed to “conflicting,” the Fifth Circuit viewed such efforts as the improper “weighing of the evidence” for summary judgment purposes. If the reversal of the summary judgment were not enough, the Fifth Circuit continued to pour salt on the wound. It observed that a purported reason for a decision that postdates the actual decision is necessarily illegitmate. A jury would be entitled to find that the employers’ own proffer of illegitimate reasons to the EEOC was evidence of an improper motive! In other words, the reasons offered by the employers defensively could now be considered evidence against them. This, along with the absence of written documentation of the performance issues where the employers tried to buttress those issues with documentation compiled after the fact, were now to be considered as evidence of pretext. Burton stands as a reminder that employers must identify the truly admissible “reasons” for the employee’s termination and be mindful that reasons uncovered only after reaching the decision to terminate will be discarded.
RELATED ARTICLES
Legal Pitfalls and Precautions When Returning to In-Person Events in COVID-19 Era
February 15, 2021 | Currents - Employment Law
Preemptive Strike: Employee Files TRO to Avoid Return to Workplace
September 18, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Use Your Noodle: Assistant Manager Sues Over COVID-19 Related Termination
September 11, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law
Employers Need Not Tolerate HR Professionals Who Encourage Coworkers to File Discrimination Suits
July 31, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
SCOTUS Favors Employers’ Religious Liberties Over Employee Rights
July 9, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination, Supreme Court Watch
Legal Pitfalls and Precautions When Returning to In-Person Events in COVID-19 Era
February 15, 2021 | Currents - Employment Law
Preemptive Strike: Employee Files TRO to Avoid Return to Workplace
September 18, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Use Your Noodle: Assistant Manager Sues Over COVID-19 Related Termination
September 11, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law
Employers Need Not Tolerate HR Professionals Who Encourage Coworkers to File Discrimination Suits
July 31, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
SCOTUS Favors Employers’ Religious Liberties Over Employee Rights
July 9, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination, Supreme Court Watch
That’s A Wrap: No Workplace Class Action For California Chipotle Workers
January 28, 2020 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Indiana Federal Court Gives Frostbitten ADA Plaintiff The Cold Shoulder
November 22, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Sixth Circuit Confirms Standard for 'Regarded As' Discrimination Under the ADA
November 12, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Big Changes For Illinois Employers: Workplace Transparency Act
September 24, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Workplace Culture and Conduct
Navigating Discrimination Claims With Strong Documentation
September 6, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Illinois EPA Amendment Lowers Standard For Discrimination Claims
August 8, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Divided SCOTUS Affirms Auer Deference to Agencies’ Interpretations
July 3, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Supreme Court Watch
Misidentification of Employer in Discrimination Charge Not Enough for Dismissal
June 14, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination
Don't Assume That One-Size-Fits-All Employment Policies Work Everywhere
April 5, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Workplace Culture and Conduct
New Illinois #MeToo Legislation Targets Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
April 3, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Employment Discrimination
OFCCP Issues New Directive for Analyzing Compensation
September 4, 2018 | Affirmative Action, Currents - Employment Law
Eleventh Circuit Overturns Dismissal of Race-Based Minimum Wage Statute Challenge
July 30, 2018 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Sixth Circuit Holds Full-Time Presence at Work not Essential Simply Because an Employer Says So
July 20, 2018 | Employment Discrimination, Pregnancy, Currents - Employment Law
Sixth Circuit Looks to Seventh and Ninth Circuits in Reviving Firefighters Title VII Suit against Union
June 6, 2018 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
In a Culture of Inclusiveness, Don’t Overlook Age
June 1, 2018 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Simple Reminders For Developing Healthy Workplace Culture
May 31, 2018 | Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Letter C: Co-Workers With Criminal Records? Your Workforce May Be More Open-Minded Than You Think
May 24, 2018 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
B is for “Bias” - Is Bias The Not-So-New Cause of Discrimination?
April 24, 2018 | Employment Lessons, Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
Sixth Circuit Holds Transgender Status Protected Under Title VII
March 12, 2018 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Employment Lessons, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Ohio Bill Protecting LGBTQ Rights Receives Widespread Support at Committee Hearing
February 8, 2018 | Employment Discrimination, High Stakes Employment Issues, Currents - Employment Law
Nursing Mothers Protected under Discrimination Laws, says Connecticut Federal Court
December 28, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Employment Lessons, Pregnancy, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC Complaint Inquiries Now a Click Away With New Public Portal
November 3, 2017 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Attention, Class: Seventh Circuit Finds Preferred Teaching Methods Not Protected Activity Under ADA and Section 504
October 31, 2017 | Employment Lessons, Currents - Employment Law
Will Ohio Pass a Law to Protect LGBTQ Rights?
October 3, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
U.S. Supreme Court is Asked to Answer the Question: What Do You Mean by ‘Sex’?
September 11, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Don’t Get Caught in the Weeds: Hiring Issues and Medical Marijuana
August 21, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Court Invites EEOC’s Opinion on Whether Title VII Prohibits Sexual Orientation Discrimination
June 5, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Second Circuit Takes Second Look at Sexual Orientation Discrimination Under Title VII
May 26, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Ohio House Takes Steps to Modernize Outdated Antidiscrimination Statutes
May 23, 2017 | High Stakes Employment Issues, Currents - Employment Law
Avoiding the Danegeld: Discouraging Me-Too Claims Following a Settlement
May 5, 2017 | Employment Lessons, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Lessons Learned: Job Descriptions Do Matter
May 1, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Employment Lessons, Currents - Employment Law
Court Tells Skydiver’s Estate It Won’t Reconsider Title VII Claim
April 19, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Minnesota Human Rights Act’s Statute of Limitations Tolls When Employer Investigates Discrimination Complaints
April 13, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Suspending Employee Who Hit Boss With Vehicle Not Retaliation
April 11, 2017 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Does Same-Sex Harassment Support Gender Discrimination Claims? Texas Supreme Court to Decide
March 17, 2017 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Mugshots Gone Viral: Internet Clickbait is a Hiring Manager’s Minefield
March 16, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Transgender Bathroom Case Sent Back to Lower Courts by Supreme Court
March 8, 2017 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
A Charge-d Atmosphere: A Few Pointers When a Current Employee Files a Charge
February 21, 2017 | EEOC, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Blog Update: North Carolina Business that Fired Pregnant Employee Agrees to Three-Year Consent Decree with EEOC
February 13, 2017 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
2016: EEOC Charges Keep Climbing
February 8, 2017 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC Issues New Guidelines on National Origin Discrimination
November 23, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Seventh Circuit Discards Well-Worn Standard for Discrimination Cases
August 29, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Ray of Hope Peeks Through a Mound of Proposed EEOC Data Requirements: Senators Fight to Nix EEOC Plan
August 25, 2016 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
OSHA’s New Mandatory Electronic Recordkeeping Rule
June 23, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Transgender Bathroom Access Addressed in New EEOC Fact Sheet
May 6, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
A RIFing Yarn: How Being Able to Support a RIF Pays Off Down the Road
April 23, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
The Benefits of Adopting an Effective Complaint-Reporting Procedure
April 22, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Court Says Mandatory Flu Vaccine for Hospital Worker Does Not Violate Title VII
April 18, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Don’t Call a Transgender Employee “It”
April 6, 2016 | Employment Discrimination, Workplace Culture and Conduct, Currents - Employment Law
Federal Court Allows ADEA “Pattern-or-Practice” Claim to Proceed
November 23, 2015 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
DO IT FOR THE VINE! How This Week’s Viral Social Media Trend Can Spark Legal Liability in the Workplace
November 11, 2015 | Social Media and Technology, Currents - Employment Law
Second Circuit Clarifies Viability of Retaliation Claim Under Section 1983 For Having Complained of Discrimination
September 4, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Not All Good Deeds Are Punished: A Paid Suspension Is Not An Adverse Employment Action For Title VII
August 19, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
More Hope for Employers Who Have Ever Felt Bullied by the EEOC
July 1, 2015 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Do Not Seek DNA Information From Employees…
June 19, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Zoo Fires Employee For Social Media Comment About Serving “Rude A** White People”
June 18, 2015 | Social Media and Technology, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC Targets Minnesota Company For Alleged Transgender Discrimination
June 17, 2015 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Unanimity and Clarity: U.S. Supreme Court Outlines Standards for Judicial Review of EEOC Conciliation
April 29, 2015 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
U.S. Supreme Court to Provide Guidance on Constructive Discharge Statute of Limitations Period
April 29, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
No Girls Allowed Isn’t Allowed: Even Roughnecks Have To Follow The Law
April 1, 2015 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Saks Settles Controversial Transgender Discrimination Case
March 9, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Man Claiming Hand Scanning Time Clock Causes “Mark of the Beast” Wins Religious Discrimination Suit
January 23, 2015 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Hope For Employers: Some Courts Are Requiring The EEOC To Thoroughly Investigate Allegations Before Siding With Employees
January 15, 2015 | EEOC, Currents - Employment Law
Recent Case In Michigan Highlights Increased Focus On Transgender Discrimination
November 7, 2014 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Watch Your Language in the Workplace: Timeless Challenge for Employers
October 3, 2014 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC SUES TWO EMPLOYERS FOR TRANSGENDER DISCRIMINATION
September 30, 2014 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Reminder: Pregnant Employees are a Protected Class
September 18, 2014 | Employment Discrimination, Pregnancy, Currents - Employment Law
Employee Evaluation Practices Under Scrutiny
August 1, 2014 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
Workplace Bullying may Amount to Actionable Discrimination
February 27, 2014 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Play It Safe III: Termination 2 Weeks After Suicide Attempt Keeps FMLA Claim Alive
February 10, 2014 | Employee Health Issues, Currents - Employment Law
“Using Social Media to Discriminate”: Please Read the Fine Print
December 2, 2013 | Employment Discrimination, Social Media and Technology, Currents - Employment Law
Breaking - Mixed Bag Ruling In California Mixed Motive Case
February 8, 2013 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Southern District of New York Denies ADA & FMLA Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment & Instead Grants Summary Judgment For Employer
August 17, 2012 | Employee Health Issues, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC Cannot Claim “Deliberative Process Privilege” To Preclude Investigator’s Deposition
July 25, 2012 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Sixth Circuit Expands on "Cat's Paw" Discrimination
July 16, 2012 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
Complaints Need Not Include Facts Which Would Support a Prima Facie Case of Discrimination under McDonnell Douglas
July 5, 2012 | Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
EEOC Finds that Transgender Workers Are Protected by Title VII
June 4, 2012 | EEOC, Employment Discrimination, Currents - Employment Law
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center