December 04, 2012
A 59-year-old Massachusetts man was hired into a prestigious hotel job, but
his employer’s headquarters were in Connecticut, and it really wanted him to be
there rather than in his home state. The situation went from OK to bad to
worse.
What happened. "Taylor" lived in Marshfield with
his wife, who was not in good health. After a distinguished career in hotel
management, HEI Hospitality hired him in 2006 as its senior vice president
(SVP) for acquisitions and transitions. He also recruited and mentored general
managers. Even HEI’s initial offer required Taylor to relocate to Norwalk,
Connecticut, but he refused to move his wife and was persuaded to spend at
least one day a week in Norwalk but travel to HEI properties from Marshfield
the rest of the time.
Things went very well for 2 years, but a new SVP for operations wanted all top officers to relocate to Norwalk. Taylor was given a choice: Go to Norwalk or take a bump down to general manager of the Cambridge, MA, hotel. Taylor promptly hired a lawyer, who just as promptly told top management he and his client believed the team was discriminating against Taylor because of his age. He soon met with a top officer, who withdrew the Norwalk offer and left only the demotion to Cambridge on the table.
Taylor negotiated extensively but was able to wrestle only a small increase in the new salary and nothing else. On the day HEI had demanded he accept the new job or else, Taylor filed a charge of age discrimination against the company. He was fired by e-mail within hours.
Taylor sued HEI in federal district court, where his case was sent to a jury. The panel found the employer liable for retaliation, but not for age discrimination. However, it awarded Taylor steep damages of nearly $3 million, including his attorneys’ fees. HEI appealed to the 1st Circuit, which covers Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
What the court said. About one-third of the jury’s award had been for emotional distress, and the district court cut that in half before the appeals court considered the case. Appellate judges found even $500,000 "grossly excessive" for distress that had not required any treatment or caused any infirmity. So they reduced it further to $200,000. Trainor v. HEI Hospitality, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, No. 12-1152 (10/31/12).
Point to remember: Retaliation is easier to prove than bias, and even $200,000 isn’t cheap. Giving in to rage and promptly firing a top executive for (1) continually arguing for a better deal in a transition and (2) filing a charge of discrimination is a luxury most companies can ill afford.
http://hr.blr.com/HR-news/Discrimination/Age-Discrimination/Retaliation-can-be-expensiveThings went very well for 2 years, but a new SVP for operations wanted all top officers to relocate to Norwalk. Taylor was given a choice: Go to Norwalk or take a bump down to general manager of the Cambridge, MA, hotel. Taylor promptly hired a lawyer, who just as promptly told top management he and his client believed the team was discriminating against Taylor because of his age. He soon met with a top officer, who withdrew the Norwalk offer and left only the demotion to Cambridge on the table.
Taylor negotiated extensively but was able to wrestle only a small increase in the new salary and nothing else. On the day HEI had demanded he accept the new job or else, Taylor filed a charge of age discrimination against the company. He was fired by e-mail within hours.
Taylor sued HEI in federal district court, where his case was sent to a jury. The panel found the employer liable for retaliation, but not for age discrimination. However, it awarded Taylor steep damages of nearly $3 million, including his attorneys’ fees. HEI appealed to the 1st Circuit, which covers Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
What the court said. About one-third of the jury’s award had been for emotional distress, and the district court cut that in half before the appeals court considered the case. Appellate judges found even $500,000 "grossly excessive" for distress that had not required any treatment or caused any infirmity. So they reduced it further to $200,000. Trainor v. HEI Hospitality, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, No. 12-1152 (10/31/12).
Point to remember: Retaliation is easier to prove than bias, and even $200,000 isn’t cheap. Giving in to rage and promptly firing a top executive for (1) continually arguing for a better deal in a transition and (2) filing a charge of discrimination is a luxury most companies can ill afford.
No comments:
Post a Comment