Texas Employment Lawyer

Texas Employment Lawyer

Discrimination, Retaliation, Wrongful Termination, and Unpaid Wages

Texas Toll Free (800) 313-4020
Dallas-Fort Worth Area (214) 528-6500
Austin (512) 271-5527

Category Archives: Pretext

Subscribe to Pretext RSS Feed

An employer’s failure to comply with the plain language of its own policy is enough to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to the true reason for firing an employee.

Posted in Age discrimination, Pretext
“In light of Pate’s wrongful interpretation and application of its Policy, and its failure to discharge a younger driver with four violations in a two-year period, a reasonable jury could disagree that Defendant’s stated reason for Plaintiff’s discharge was the true or real reason for terminating him, and find that the stated reason was pretext… Continue Reading

Failure to retain other older employees, Plaintiff who was 66, another who was 60, and two other older employees, after “outsourcing,” while retaining younger employees bolsters an inference of pretext.

Posted in Age discrimination, Pretext
“Although this evidence on its own likely would not support an inference of pretext, a rational juror could conclude that [Defendant’s] failure to re-hire these employees on a full-time basis further weakens the credibility of [Defendant’s] proffered rationale for not hiring [Plaintiff], thus buttressing a reasonable inference that the failure to rehire [Plaintiff] was based… Continue Reading

Evidence that the hiring decisions were based on subjective considerations such as, “looking for…a candidate…to kind of complement [him]” or “felt that [the successful] applicant would be a good instruction leader for her teachers,” may be pretext for age discrimination.

Posted in Age discrimination, Pretext
“[W]e have recognized that subjective hiring criteria “ ‘provide opportunities for unlawful discrimination’ because the criteria itself may be pretext for age discrimination.” Id. at 11, citing Medina v. Ramsey Steel Co., 238 F.3d 674, 681 (5th Cir.2001) (quoting Lindsey v. Prive Corp., 987 F.2d 324, 327 (5th Cir.1993)).       Stennett v. Tupelo… Continue Reading

Evidence that hiring decisions were based on qualifications not found in the job posting is evidence of pretext.

Posted in Pretext
“This court has held that an employer’s reliance on “previously unmentioned” job requirements can raise a “genuine issue of material fact as to pretext.” Id. at 11, citing Moss v. BMC Software, Inc., 610 F.3d 917, 926 (5th Cir.2010). Plaintiff was able to point to evidence that the “proffered reason for hiring [an] Assistant Principal… Continue Reading

Where Plaintiff applies for seven positions and is never interviewed for five of them, a jury reasonably could determine that it was not a mere coincidence that Plaintiff was denied interviews.

Posted in Pretext
“Although…individual principals had the ultimate power to decide whom to interview, the record nevertheless supports a finding that the individual principals conferred in deciding not to interview [Plaintiff].” Id. at 10.   “Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to [Plaintiff]…we conclude that a jury reasonably could determine that it was not a mere… Continue Reading

An employer’s failure to interview a candidate with exemplary qualifications, pertinent experience, and excellent performance reviews may be used to show pretext.

Posted in Pretext
“With regard to the assistant principal and administrative intern positions,…[Plaintiff] not only possessed two certifications in school…but also had worked in a supervisory administrative capacity…for many years. [Plaintiff’s] prior experience as an administrator was corroborated through the testimony…. Further, with regard to the “lead teacher” and “testing coordinator” positions, the evidence showed that [Plaintiff] had… Continue Reading

In a failure to hire case, three advanced degrees; four administrative and teaching certifications; thirty-eight years of educational experience overall; twenty years of experience within the school district; and experience directly pertinent to the position in comparison to other applicants is directly probative of pretext.

Posted in Failure to hire, Pretext
“A reasonable jury could consider the strength of [Plaintiff’s] qualifications vis-à-vis the successful younger applicants as undermining the credibility of [Defendant’s] proffered hiring rationale—i.e., that the younger successful applicants were selected because they were all better qualified than her. Indeed, evidence of a plaintiff’s superior qualifications is directly probative of pretext, Patterson, 491 U.S. at… Continue Reading

Plaintiff’s stronger qualifications can by itself create pretext in a failure to hire case. No “clearly better qualified” analysis required

Posted in Failure to hire, Pretext
“A reasonable jury could consider the strength of [Plaintiff’s] qualifications vis-à-vis the successful younger applicants as undermining the credibility of [Defendant’s] proffered hiring rationale—i.e., that the younger successful applicants were selected because they were all better qualified than her. Indeed, evidence of a plaintiff’s superior qualifications is directly probative of pretext, Patterson, 491 U.S. at… Continue Reading

Evidence that co-employee or manager misrepresented employment test results that may have been caused by employee’s disability shows disability animus that may be imputed to company to show pretext because employer relied on that misrepresentation to terminate plaintiff.

Posted in Cat's paw, Imputing Improper Motive, Pretext
  As discussed above, Hauss allegedly misrepresented the erratic test results—which Dr. McKinnon and Audiologist Sanders attribute to Brown’s hearing disability—to the decisionmaker Goodson, thereby creating a factual issue as to whether Hauss exhibited disability-based animus. In turn, Goodson conducted a subsequent investigation into Brown’s conduct, including, among other things, consultation with Hauss. Goodson testified… Continue Reading