 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Town v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.7/31/1997
McCONNELL v. ROLLINS BURDICK HUNTER OF MICHIGAN, INCORPORATED
Docket Nos. 102845, 103476. Argued January 15, 1997 (Calendar Nos. 10 11). Decided July 31, 1997.
Wayne Circuit Court, James E. Mies, J.
VERONICA TOWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, TED McCONNELL and NANCY McCONNELL, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ROLLINS BURDICK HUNTER OF MICHIGAN, INCORPORATED, and MILLER, MASON & DICKENSON, INC., Defendants-Appellants.
BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH
The issue presented in these consolidated cases is whether the plaintiffs, McConnell and Town, have presented sufficient evidence of age or sex discrimination to surmount a motion for summary Disposition and a motion for a directed verdict, respectively. We conclude in both cases that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence that discrimination had been a determining factor in their employers' decisions.
I.
McConnell v Rollins Burdick Hunter
In July of 1988, Ted McConnell accepted a job as a sales representative with Rollins Burdick Hunter (RBH). RBH sold health insurance and provided insurance-related consulting services. At the time that he was hired, McConnell was fifty-five years old.
In January of 1989, the plaintiff was informed that he needed to improve his sales production. The plaintiff's next review was in September of 1989. Because the plaintiff's sales revenue had not significantly improved by that time, he was informed that if his revenue did not increase that "there will have to be some adjustment made." The plaintiff was unable to improve his production.
RBH discharged McConnell in January of 1990. At that time, the plaintiff was fifty-seven years old. The plaintiff brought suit against defendants RBH and Miller, Mason, and Dickenson, Inc., alleging breach of employment contract, promissory estoppel, and age discrimination. The trial court granted summary Disposition for the defendants on each of the plaintiff's claims.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals initially affirmed the decision of the trial court. The plaintiff then moved for a rehearing on the age discrimination claim which was granted. On rehearing, the Court affirmed, but remanded the case for trial of the plaintiff's age discrimination claim in an unpublished opinion per curiam. The defendants appealed that decision in this Court. We granted leave and consolidated this case with Town v Michigan Bell.
Town v Michigan Bell Telephone Company
In 1980, Veronica Town sought a departmental transfer from her position of product-line manager with the Michigan Bell Telephone Company. She was interviewed by the assessment center and was offered a position. She turned it down, however, when she learned of the assessment center's schedule, which consisted of a four-day work week, with twelve-hour shifts. This schedule was unacceptable to her because she needed to be home in the evenings to care for her husband, who was suffering from severe health problems.
Instead, the plaintiff accepted a position as manager of market administrators. After one year, the plaintiff's supervisor notified her that she was being transferred to the assessment center because her position was being consolidated with that of another manager. The person who held the other position was leaving the company. A thirty five-year-old male, James Aveck, assumed the consolidated position.
Still under the impression that the assessment center's schedule was incompatible with her husband's needs, the plaintiff resigned and accepted early retirement. The plaintiff was forty-nine years old
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Michigan Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|