I never get tired of these cases. Last week, an Idaho Federal District Court recently denied summary judgment to an employer in an age discrimination case. In Wold v. El Centro Fin., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50958 (D. Idaho June 16, 2009), the plaintiff argued that he had been rejected for a position because of his age, 46.
As is common these days, much of the hiring process was electronic. Wold emailed his resume to El Centro, expressing his interest in a job opening. The resume made its way around the company, and ended up in the inbox of the company CEO. The CEO, apparently thinking that he was responding to his own HR staff, actually sent an email to the plaintiff which stated, in part: "Damn. I'm here late trying to get through emails -- I just saw this one I missed somehow and it is a week old. Check it out -- I don't know what I think. He must be old -- and just looking for something to do."
Do I even need to tell you how the story ends? Wold doesn’t get the job, and sues for age discrimination. The employer moves for summary judgment, and loses, primarily because the court concluded that the email from the CEO was evidence of discriminatory intent. No kidding.
Likewise, do I even need to discuss what might be “lessons learned” from this case? 1) Don’t refer to protected characteristics when making employment decisions, especially not in writing; and 2) Check that TO: field before you hit send.