The Inbox, Snowquester Edition

Here at the SuitsbySuits Tower in Washington, D.C., we’re closing the week of the Snowquester that Wasn’t, a snowstorm that could have given us a large thumping of snow but turned out to be…well, more disappointing than a playoff loss by you-know-who.  The chatter about the storm has, though, led to a rare mea culpa by a prominent weather blog and pretty much kicked off the Virginia governor’s race in a dispute over one candidate’s tweet about safety in the snow. 

In any event, things other than a poem-inducing non-blizzard happened this week, and here are the highlights: Read More ›

The Inbox

Our hurricane-proof edition of the latest in Suits by Suits news:

• The last time you flew, was the toilet paper in the loo “exposed,” with an unfolded end square?  Then you weren’t on the jet of Abercrombie & Fitch boss Michael Jeffries.  The Associated Press writes that an age discrimination lawsuit by a former pilot has uncovered an exhaustive flight manual for members of the crew of Jeffries’ jet.  Among the requirements: current issues of magazines must always be on the right side of the credenza.  No hats if it’s over 40 degrees.  And the toilet paper folding, of course.

Saving Cash Saves Employer From Age Discrimination Claim

An executive who brings a discrimination claim must jump through a number of hurdles to get to trial.  On this blog, we’ve posted on a number of occasions about how under the McDonnell-Douglas test, an executive must prove a prima facie case of discrimination, after which the employer has the opportunity to show that it acted for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.  If the employer meets this burden, and the executive cannot come forward with evidence to rebut these legitimate reasons, then the court will award summary judgment to the employer before the case even gets to a trial. 

The Eleventh Circuit’s recent decision in Ostrow v. GlobeCast Am. Inc., No. 11-16043 (11th Cir. Sep. 17, 2012), provides another example of how an employer can defeat a claim of discrimination by presenting non-discriminatory reasons for its actions.   Read More ›