Poor attitudes among managers and supervisors can infect the rest of an organization, and courts are becoming more aware of the adverse effects of such so-called “poisoned wells.”
As the following case shows, when higher-ups in the organizational hierarchy display signs of discrimination, those lower down may act on those signs.
Recent case: Donald Brown was 56 years old when he signed up for a four-year apprentice program to become a cable splicer. Throughout his training, he heard comments about his age from other apprentices and supervisors. He also heard a rumor that he was never going to be allowed to pass the key exam required for graduation, even though he had no trouble learning the skills being taught. Lo and behold, he didn’t pass the test.
He sued, alleging that those who were assigned to work with him on the practical exam were sabotaging him, believing that wanted him to fail. Brown argued that all the workers reflected management’s bias against older apprentices and thus saw flaws that they would have ignored in younger test-takers.
The court called this the poisoned well. The court ordered a jury trial to determine whether age discrimination was the reason Brown didn’t pass. (Brown v. Detroit Edison, No. 06-11736, ED MI, 2009)
Final note: Of course, if this had been an objective test that didn’t require subjective input from others, there would have been no problem, as long as the test was well designed and valid.
- How to Fire an Employee the Legal Way: 6 Termination Guidelines
- 10 Secrets to an Effective Performance Review
- Keeping Madison Square Garden's legal team fully employed ...
- OK to use candidate observations to justify hiring decisions
- Leave off job application any language that limits time frames for employee to sue
- Cut no slack just because employee won award