Age discrimination RIF case raises waiver, forced-ranking performance evaluation issues
Findlaw (AP) reports:“Ex-Capital One Workers Allege Age Bias”:
An age-discrimination lawsuit against Capital One Financial Corp., filed in U.S. District Court in Richmond, contends “a disproportionately high number of older employees were fired for purported poor performance, although they had met or exceeded expectations in previous job appraisals.”
“The [five] plaintiffs are seeking $90 million in damages.”
Wow, I’m impressed. $18 million apiece. They must have a great case, huh?
“A similar lawsuit, asking for more than $50 million, was settled with as many as 60 former workers for an undisclosed amount in June. AARP, the nonprofit organization for people 50 and older, was co-counsel in that lawsuit. Capital One said that it does not comment on pending litigation and that it has a strict policy against any type of discrimination.”
But apparently not a strict enough policy against settling cases that might encourage further litigation.
“Four of the plaintiffs were in middle management, and one was an hourly employee. Some received separation and other benefits, plus additional pay equivalent to eight weeks’ salary from Capital One if they agreed not to sue for age discrimination. The employees allege that the waivers were illegal and part of a plan to deter legal challenges.”
I’d like to see why they think the waivers were illegal. There are strict requirements on these, but these requirements are not difficult to satisfy. I’d be somewhat surprised to find a major corporation like this messed up something so basic.
“The company implemented a rigorous forced-ranking employee-appraisal system that led to the firings. In a forced ranking, a certain percentage of employees must get low grades – which lead to termination. Capital One has backed off the forced-ranking system since it was implemented in fall 2001, according to the lawsuit.”
Forced-ranking can certainly be controversial (and unpopular with employees), but it is a way of countering the all-to-common tendency towards “grade inflation” in performance evaluations. (Does anyone still grade students on an “Bell curve”?)
