A former employee wins $1.8M in an age discrimination lawsuit... WOW

[AlbertC]

Just stumbled accross this article linked from an industry newsletter that I get: a former employee at Roche (the pharmasuitical company) felt that there was verbal age disctimation happening to him at work, and a judge agreed. He was awarded 1.8 million dollars in a lawsuit.

Of course, there was a wrongful termination suit tied up in all this as well, but still, that's a big sum for a type of litigation that often doesn't make it to trial.

Here's the article:
https://www.seniorforums.com/showthread.php/25-Too-old-for-the-job

 

[overthehill]

That is amazing indeed.Thanks for the info,Im going to read that.

 

[Bill.K]

It's cases like these that make me so confused. How long was the employee out of work, to be out $168,000? And $1,700,000 for pain and suffering? I can't comprehend that, in war people are told to kill others and can have their own limbs lost or worse their life... How is it that someone who was wrongfully fired get $1.8M and veterans are lucky if they can afford their rent and get the mental help they need. It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[phughes]

Pharma sales reps have the ability to make a lot of money The settlement probably was derived at looking at his working for the next 10 years -- but I am surprised at "pain and suffering." However, Roche will put in place now, no doubt, a protocol for working with employees, with sensitivity to employees with long tenure.

I have been at my company more than 20 years, and have had to change and use technology not even thought of when I started! If this person was doing his job as well as others, but just differently than the young manager, he has every reason to be upset. It's too bad that in these situations the employees don't take the time to learn from each other.

 

[Bill.K]

That'd make sense I guess if it was based off of 10 years. But I don't know why they didn't label it as lost pay.

 

[AlbertC]

The details of the story certianly surprised me as well. Thing is, usually these cases are settled out of court. They obviously got a very sympathetic bench for this ruling.

 

[TabbyAnn]

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Butterfly]

That'd make sense I guess if it was based off of 10 years. But I don't know why they didn't label it as lost pay.

Probably because calling it back pay would make it a taxable event and thus reduce it's actual value to the employee. When the guy filed suit, he probably didn't ask for lost wages, for that reason.

 

[LogicsHere]

Not all veterans are forgotten; a neighbor of my mother's just told me the other day he received a half million from the government plus a $3000 a month pension in addition to his SS. He served in Viet Nam.