MA federal court tosses age, race bias case for lack of evidence

The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently put an end to a bank employee’s age and race claims because she failed to prove the employer’s stated reason for her termination (i.e., misconduct uncovered during an investigation into an unsolicited employee complaint) was a pretext (or cover-up) for discrimination. In doing so, the court rejected her argument that the real reason was age and race bias.

Facts

Gail Sweeney was an employee of Santander Bank, N.A., until being terminated after coworkers complained about her workplace conduct and an ensuing investigation substantiated their complaints. Her lawsuit alleged she was fired in violation of state and federal age discrimination laws.

Sweeney worked for Santander as a fraud analyst. In 2014, the fraud department moved to a new location, she went with it, and her job responsibilities changed. In the new location, she stopped processing fraud claims and began speaking directly with customers in a call center environment. She sat at an open table with six coworkers, and everyone could see and hear one another.

After the fraud department moved, Sweeney alleges older workers were “weeded out” and that Santander began hiring more Spanish-speaking employees (the company set up a new unit called the “Fraud Center of Excellence” comprised of bilingual college graduates). Not surprisingly, the employer denied the allegations.