Background
Relevant Laws
Summary
- In 2003, Gross being 54 was reassigned from Claims Administration Director to Claims Project Coordinator.
- A younger employee that Gross supervised prior took over Gross' old position.
- Gross' pay stayed the same amount.
- This caused Gross to sue FBL for age discrimination.
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
- Title VII was amended to explicitly authorize discrimination claims in which an improper consideration was a "motivating factor" for an adverse employment decision.
- The court has different construction of the same critical language in the ADEA and Title VII.
- The court rejects "but-for" in the Price Waterhouse Case.
- Yet in Gross' case, the court resurrects the standard.
History
- The 8th circuit reversed the decision.
- U.S Supreme Court reviews the ruling.
-Gross found age as a motivating factor
-FBL demoted him regardless of his age
Arguments
- In Price Waterhouse V. Hopskins the court determined that if the plaintiffs membership in a protected class had something to do with the decision, the defendant may avoid finding a liability.
- Though Title VII was amended, the court maked sure to not add them to ADEA claims.
Gross V. FBL Financial Services, Inc.