Dr. R. Johnson’s Notes:

TBW’sèChap. 7’s (i.e., Hiring & Promotion Dec.’s w/i Legal)

Analysis {i.e., Responses to 5 ?’s} Summary:

Meeting # 18: Medina v. Ramsey Steel Co.

238 F. 3d 674 (5th Cir. 2001)TBW’s pg.’s => 199-200.

Case bkgrd in brief:

Situation is presented of some “long-time (L-T..Medina)” employee who was interested in promotion but passed over 3 times. Each time, the employer promoted some person years younger than L-T employee. In the most recent occasion, the employer claimed L-T employee was unqualified b/c he [Medina] “lacked” substantial sales experience. Medina sued for age discrimination.

1). What was the legal issue in this case? What did the court

decide?

· Does an employer’s subjective criterion judgment about a job candidate’s qualifications defeat a prima facie case of disparate treatment (d. t.)? District court =>Yes; Appeals court => No.

2). How was Medina able to establish a prima facie case of

disparate treatment?

· Age (over 40) check; Employer informed (promotion interest) check; Rejected, check; younger person (hired) check; No clear dec. criteria, check; subjective assessment (Employer’s defense) check; In fact, Medina does have substantial sales experience thus, he has prima facie case of d. t..

· What was the employer’s stated reason for not promoting Medina?

o Lack of “substantial sales experience.

· What was Medina’s evidence of pretext?

o Way they talked è …wrong ….”ingredients & “…get rid of ole…”

3) What does the court say about the relationship between

subjective criteria and a plaintiff’s ability to est. a prima facie

case of d. t.??

· Employee’s prima facie case CANNOT {.i.e. never} be defeated by employer’s dec. to use subjective criteria b/c employee need only show that he or she meets objective standards that are established and applied to all. So, we conclude that business organizations (i.e., employers) can legally use “subjective” judgments if they want as a basis to DENY employment opportunities but beware b/c its risky b/c employee will also have opportunity to show that such judgments are pretextual.

Note: I will post 4 & 5 later; stopped to do grading. Thanks.

Dr. W. Roy Johnson

4. What is the role of the court in this type of case?

To review whether candidates were correctly assessed? To determine whether selection criteria and assessment procedures were reasonable? Something else?

Answer…my notes:

· Determine: if P.C.C.’s ---was used

o NOT…è assessments of candidates

o If dec. system based or used “wild assumptions”

o about pcc’s then likely find motiveàpretext

5. What should the employer have done differently in this case?

· Publicize

· Objective

· Applied

o To All