When someone claims age discrimination, he typically has to show that he was replaced by someone “significantly younger.” What that means is unclear—and courts seem in no hurry to come up with a hard-and-fast rule.
Recent case: Mark was fired from his job with a storage company and immediately assumed—based on his manager’s comments about Mark’s use of old technology like a day planner and pen instead of a smartphone—that the real reason was his age.
He sued, and showed that someone five years younger had replaced him. The company argued that was not a significant age difference.
The court refused to toss out the case on that basis, concluding instead that it was unwilling to set an exact age difference that would constitute “significantly younger.” (Glassmire v. Public Storage, No. 4:11-CV-748, ND TX, 2013)
Like what you've read? ...Republish it and share great business tips!
Attention: Readers, Publishers, Editors, Bloggers, Media, Webmasters and more...
We believe great content should be read and passed around. After all, knowledge IS power. And good business can become great with the right information at their fingertips. If you'd like to share any of the insightful articles on BusinessManagementDaily.com, you may republish or syndicate it without charge.
The only thing we ask is that you keep the article exactly as it was written and formatted. You also need to include an attribution statement and link to the article.
" This information is proudly provided by Business Management Daily.com: http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/35691/court-years-alone-wont-define-significantly-younger "