Article

Appeals Court Reinstates Discrimination Suit Against Inland Paperboard

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated an age discrimination suit filed by Inland Paperboard and Packaging Inc.’s former employees, giving the U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) a chance to take the workers’ case before a jury, Capitol Media Services reports.

A three-judge appellate panel ruled unanimously that U.S. District Judge Neil Wake should not have tossed out the case, and that there was sufficient evidence for the case to go to a jury trial, according to the article carried in the East Valley Tribune.

The EEOC is representing the three workers who claim that the international company improperly terminated them because of their ages. David Neal, born in 1946, was replaced with someone born in 1961. Clifton McGraw, born in 1941, was replaced with a person born in 1961, and John Vanecko, born in 1941, was replaced with an employee born in 1968, Capitol Media Services reports.

Wake concluded — and the 9th Circuit agreed — that the changes by themselves showed disparate treatment based on age; but Wake says the EEOC did not present enough evidence to conclude there had been actual illegal discrimination.

Inland argued that the EEOC had failed to show that Neal was performing his job satisfactorily, one element required to show discrimination. The appellate court rejected that and said there was no evidence Neal’s replacement was more qualified.

The appellate judges said that the evidence in the cases of the other two workers showed that while their positions were eliminated, their job functions were still being performed, and by people who were younger, Capitol Media Services reports.

The appellate court concluded that EEOC presented sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that Inland’s reasons for the firings were merely excuses and that comments from Inland supervisors could indicate that they “harbored discriminatory animus'” toward older workers.