Partners Steven Stastny and Chad Shultz prevailed on a summary judgment motion on behalf of their client, a diversified telecommunications company, in federal and state claims of age discrimination. The lawsuit was pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.
The plaintiff, a technician whose job focused on traditional “twisted pairs” telephone copper wire, and three others in the same classification were laid off by the company in 2020. He claimed that the company's rationale for the layoffs--technological advances, the popularity of fiber transmission, and the COVID-19 pandemic--was a cover for age discrimination because older employees were not given the opportunity to train on newer technology like younger employees.
The court rejected this assertion, stating that the plaintiff’s argument failed to address evidence that the younger employees already had a broader set of skills or that it was more efficient to require employees with a shallower learning curve to pick up new skills. The court also found that the defendant's decision to let go of technicians who specialized in copper wire did not show an intent to discriminate by age because all parties acknowledged a technological shift within the industry from copper wire to fiber optic. The court made clear that the plaintiff’s arguments were little more than second-guessing of the defendant’s legitimate non-discriminatory business reason for the employment action. The court also made mention of the fact that the defendant did leave the plaintiff with options, including the invitation to apply for open positions for the broader “Service Technician” job classification.
To read the Law360 article about this result, please click here. Subscription may be required.