Option #1: Case Analysis: 1995: McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co.

1995: McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co. Christine McKennon was employed by Nashville Banner Publishing Company (Banner) for 30 years. At age 62, Ms. McKennon’s employment was terminated as part of a workforce reduction that was needed to reduce costs. Ms. McKennon believed that the termination was in fact unlawfully based on her age and filed suit claiming that this violated ADEA. During a deposition, she admitted copying confidential documents that she had access to in the course of her employment. Within a few days of the deposition, Banner notified her that removal of the documents was in violation of her job responsibilities and once again terminated her employment. Banner claimed in the letter that, had Banner known of this wrongdoing, her employment would have been terminated immediately based on this fact alone. The District Court then granted summary judgment for Banner, finding that her misconduct was grounds for her termination and that she wasn’t entitled to any remedy in light of her actions. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in order to resolve the question of whether all relief must be denied when an employer has violated the ADEA in its discharge of an employee but later discovers employee conduct that would have justified a lawful termina-tion. The Court ruled that after-acquired evidence of employee misconduct that would have resulted in a termination doesn’t relieve the employer for liability in discharging the employee for an unlawful, discriminatory reason.

This comes from

PHR/SPHR : PROFESSIONAL IN HUMAN RESOURCES

4TH EDITION

SANDRA M . REED, ANNE M. BOGARDUS