When an employer inconsistently imposes discipline and does not follow its own discipline procedures and policies, it leaves room for employees to make claims of discriminatory animus. This was recently highlighted in a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision, Earl v. Nielsen Media Research. The court held that an employee with a history of performance issues produced enough evidence to present her age discrimination case to a jury by showing that significantly younger employees who regularly violated similar company policies were treated more leniently than the more “mature” employee.
Facts of the case
Christine Earl, age 59, worked as a recruiter for Nielsen Media Research for more than 12 years. Nielsen is a company that measures television program audiences and provides the results gathered to advertisers and media outlets. Earl’s job was to recruit households and obtain their consent to install Nielsen devices relaying their viewing habits back to Nielsen.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
