Judge tosses lawsuit accusing trucking company of age/disability discrimination

A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit against Michigan trucking company FCA Transport, which was accused of firing an employee of nearly 40 years because of his age and disability. FCA Transport argued they let the employee go because of his behavior towards colleagues.

In a lawsuit filed in February 2017, the former employee accused FCA, formerly known as Chrysler Group Transport, of wrongful termination. Court documents reveal the 58-year-old man worked for FCA from 1976 until his job was terminated in December 2015. His last position was that of shift supervisor for dispatch.

Family leave
Beginning February 2011, the plaintiff was approved for intermittent Family and Medical Leave Act time off in order to take his wife to medical appointments a few days each month. This lasted until about August 2014. In April 2011, the former employee was injured in a car crash that left him with limited use of his “left upper extremity, left lower extremity and upper back,” according to the lawsuit. The man also had a noticeable limp after the crash.

After returning to work in August 2011, the plaintiff experienced difficulties in some of his job duties and requested a telephone headset. According to the lawsuit, FCA “belittled and demeaned” the man for the request. The request was granted three months later.

In October 2011, the plaintiff requested a new chair to accommodate his disabilities from the car crash. This request was denied and the man was ridiculed again, according to the suit. Consequently, the man bought his own chair in December 2011. However, the lawsuit claims his employer told him to get rid of the chair since it was not “Chrysler approved” and to “suck it up and use the chair provided.” Eventually, the plaintiff was allowed to keep the chair.

A few months later in March 2012, the plaintiff’s boss warned him that management was watching him closely regarding his use of FMLA leave. The lawsuit alleges that from that point to the day he was fired, the plaintiff was held to a higher standard than his peers, accused of petty offenses, given artificially poor performance reviews, subjected to age-biased comments, and disciplined for alleged misconduct for which other similarly situated employees were not disciplined at all.

In September 2015, the plaintiff advised his employer that he would be seeking FMLA to take care of his “sickly and aged” parents. He was told that “these things happen to everyone,” according to the suit.

This appeared to be the last straw as the plaintiff requested to be transferred to another location. The request was ignored and the man was terminated a few months later. The lawsuit accused FCA of replacing the man with “someone who had no disability, who was about 30 years younger than plaintiff, and who had not exercised rights under FMLA.”

No direct evidence
On April 13, a federal court granted FCA summary judgement. In the opinion, the court concluded that the plaintiff did not have direct evidence that he was fired because of his age. In one instance, a human resource rep asked the plaintiff “How many years have you worked here?” Plaintiff interpreted this as a direct attack, but the court noted there could be several legitimate reasons for asking this question. Despite one coworker making an ageist comment, the plaintiff acknowledged that no supervisor did so.

Regarding the disability claim, the court discovered such a claim was not filed in a timely manner. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the plaintiff had 300 days to file a complaint and then 90 days after receiving a right-to-sue letter to file civil action. Also, FCA provided both accommodations – headset and chair – within a reasonable amount of time. The court also ruled that the plaintiff was not fired because of disability since he was fired four years after the crash. In the time between the accident and the termination, the plaintiff golfed regularly, did yoga, drove a car, did laundry, washed dishes, ran errands and coached all of his son’s sports teams (basketball, baseball and soccer).

As for the FMLA retaliation, FCA had granted FMLA leave from 2011 to 2014 for the plaintiff to take care of his wife. In reference to the comments made when stating intentions to use FMLA to take care of his parents, the court noted that those comments were made by someone who likely had no part in the firing decision.

Other incidents
What the original lawsuit filed by the plaintiff failed to include was an incident in September 2014 when the former supervisor had an “uncharacteristic outburst” that he attributed to medication he was taking. In July 2015, he was suspended for inappropriate behavior and using abusive language toward an employee.

Another incident occurred in October 2015 that ultimately led to the plaintiff’s termination. While on the phone with a driver, the plaintiff put down the phone and proceeded to make disparaging remarks about the driver, not knowing the driver could hear.

The court ultimately ruled that the “plaintiff has produced no evidence from which a jury could find that the ‘real reason’ defendant discharged him was his age, his disability, or his intention to request FMLA leave.”