Beginning in 1986, Paul Rangel was a sales professional for the pharmaceutical company Sanofi Aventis U.S. LLC (S-A). Rangel had satisfactory performance reviews until 2006, when S-A issued new "Expectations" guidelines with sales call quotas and other standards that he failed to meet. After two years of negative performance reviews, Rangel-who was then more than forty years old-was terminated as part of a nationwide reduction in force of all sales professionals who had not met the "Expectations" guidelines, including younger workers. Did S-A engage in age discrimination?
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is a "Select: federal/state law.
Discrimination based on age may occur at what age and beyond?
"Select: 40/50/60/65"
How many years did Rangel work for Sanofi Aventis before he was terminated?
"Select: 20/22/24/26'
Elements of a prima facie case for discrimination include:
1. Can Rangel show he was in a protected group?
"Select: Yes/No
Why? He was over "Select: 40/50/60/65" 5 years of age.
2. Can Rangel show he was qualified for the position from which he was discharged?
"Select: Yes/No"
How? He worked in that job for over "Select?: 10/20/30" 7 years.
3. Was Rangel discharged because of age discrimination?
"Select: Yes/No
In order to prove age discrimination Rangel must prove that "Selec: this termination was motivated at least in part by age discrimination/his termination was motivated entirely by his age"
Was there a reason given by the employer to terminate Rangel?
"Select: Yes/No"
What was the reason?
"Select: He was getting slow/The company was reducing its force/He failed to meet the new "expectations" guidelines"
Regardless of the facts in this case, is this reason an example of a possible pretext, or excuse, in order to terminate someone because he was just too old?
"Select: Yes/No"
What facts show that Rangel's termination was not based on age?
1. "Select:Rangel had satisfactory performance reviews for 20 years/Rangel failed to meet the new "expectation" guidelines/the "expectations" guidelines unfairly affected older workers/the reduction of force was an annual occurrence/Rangel was ready to retire"
2. "Select:Rangel had satisfactory performance reviews for 20 years/there was a reduction of forcethe "expectations" guidelines unfairly affected older workersthe reduction of force was an annual occurrence/Rangel was ready to retire"
3. "Select: Rangel had satisfactory performance reviews for 20 years/ the "expectations" guidelines unfairly affected older workersother workers under 40 years of age were also terminated/the reduction of force was an annual occurrence/Rangel was ready to retiree"
Would a court likely find Rangel was terminated based solely on age?
"Select: Yes/No"