6th Circ. Bias Ruling Shows Job Evaluations Are Key Defense, Published in Law360

An article published on 5/3 in Law360 by Segal McCambridge Shareholder Michael Luchsinger discusses a legal case in Kentucky where the court found that an employee’s claims of religious discrimination were undermined by the employee’s disruptive office behavior and poor job performance. The employee in question posted homophobic comments on Allstate videos that expressed support for the LGBTQ community.

Luchsinger explains that the employee’s attempts to allege workplace harassment for his personal religious views were negated by his consistently documented performance history, which eventually led to his firing.

“Regarding the retaliation claim, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling which held that Wehrly actually met the prima facie elements of the retaliation claim, but ultimately granted summary judgment based on Allstate’s ‘legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for terminating his employment – the failure to achieve measurable performance goals,’” writes Luchsinger. “Where Wehrly lost the case was on Allstate’s basis for his termination.

Wehrly’s legal arguments stated he had met or exceeded workplace goals for 20 of the 29 years during his employ, and that negative feedback on his performance did not commence until his comments on the Allstate videos. However, the court found his underperformance preceded said online comments by several years

“The Wehrly case shows the importance of regularly evaluating employee performance objectively and further communicating the assessments to the employees,” Luchsinger writes. “A good evaluation system can be the difference between getting a case dismissed on summary judgment or having to take your chances at trial.”   

Read the story in full; click here. (subscriber-based).