Supervisor’s take-home: Beware the potential pitfalls of gag gifts, especially when the gifts could be linked to a protected characteristic such as age.
What happened: When a woman turned 50 years old, her boss and coworkers threw a birthday party for her. At the party, they handed her several gag gifts, including a wheelchair, fake pill bottles and adult diapers. Although the older staffer accepted the gifts, she wasn’t amused.
What people did: Shortly after the party, the older woman’s boss began to ask her when she planned to retire. And during her annual performance review, the crew member received a rating of “meets expectations.” The woman told her boss that it was the worst review she’d ever gotten and asked whether she needed to hire an attorney. The staffer was later placed on a performance improvement plan (PIP) due to her poor attitude and failure to follow directions. At the end of the PIP, she was terminated for failing to demonstrate satisfactory performance improvement.
Legal challenge: The woman sued for age bias, pointing to the offensive gifts she received at her 50th birthday party as potential proof of age discrimination.
Result: The company won. The court dismissed the age-discrimination lawsuit, saying the employer provided adequate evidence that the older staffer failed to meet the performance expectations spelled out in her PIP. The judge said the gifts given to the woman at her birthday party were in poor taste but, by themselves, didn’t prove age discrimination.
The skinny: Employers that offer struggling staff members a tangible plan for improvement are usually in a better position should someone later sue. Reason: The PIP helps show that poor performance – not age or some other protected characteristic – guided the decision-making.
Cite: Liebau v. Dykema Gossett, U.S. Court of Appeals 6, No. 23-1301, 4/23/24.
(From the May 10, 2024, issue of HR Manager’s Legal Alert for Supervisors. To start your no-obligation trial subscription to the publication right now, please click here.)