No Age or Sex Discrimination Found With Position Reassignment

Specialty Lines	Valid Reduction
Employment Related Practices	Under Performance

Veronica Town (Town) worked for Bell Telephone Company (Bell). Town initiated an opportunity to make a transfer. After an interview with Bell, they offered her the job. However, when Town learned that the work schedule involved four 12-hour shifts, she had to decline. She provided care for her husband with a serious health condition, and this type of work schedule would not be a good fit. So instead, she accepted a position as a manager in another area.

About a year later, due to internal organizational changes, Town learned she was being transferred to the position she had initially turned down because her position as manager was being consolidated into another job. The consolidated managerial position was given to a 35-year-old male. Town felt forced to resign and took early retirement at age 49. She filed suit against Bell, citing both age and sex discrimination.

The jurisdiction of the suit bounced between state and federal court, finally ending within state jurisdiction. A trial was held with a verdict in favor of Town. Bell appealed and requested a directed verdict. Bell contended there was a valid reduction in the workforce that necessitated the consolidation and transfer. Town was not selected for the consolidated position because her performance (in the opinion of Bell) was not as good as the person given the job. Both employees were qualified for the combined position.

Town could not produce evidence that age or sex entered into the decision. The Michigan Supreme Court made a decision in favor of Bell.

Veronica Town, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Defendant-Appellee, Michigan Supreme Court, Lansing, Michigan, No. 97-102845, July 31, 1997.