Thursday, March 02, 2006

TEAM STILL DOESN'T GET IT

TEAM Industries
still doesn’t get it
It is unfortunate that TEAM Industries has learned so little from the recent court case. The evidence revealed TEAM laid off skilled, older workers with excellent skills and loyal service and kept younger, brand new employees with little or no previous experience. In Park Rapids, 72.7 percent of those terminated by their forced choice tool were over 40, but only 40.4 percent of the people in those jobs were over 40. The chances of being terminated if you were in your 20s or 30s, was only about 7 percent, but if you were 60, it was 10 times that or 75 percent.
The testimony revealed if the first deselection list was used, Mr. LaBonte would not have been terminated. But replacement list after replacement list was used, constantly changing who would be terminated. TEAM Industries did not follow its own deselection tool, but granted exemption to whomever it wished.
Even before the layoff in issue here, the age of TEAM’s workforce was substantially below what one would expect it to be if age was not a factor in hiring and firing employees.
Expert testimony revealed that the layoff was extremely unlikely to have occurred as it did if age was not a factor. TEAM’s own expert testified TEAM had not followed recognized procedures to assure a non-discriminatory termination.
After Mr. LaBonte was terminated, he was never offered a new position by TEAM.
It is unfortunate that TEAM still publicly attacks a person who it admits was a hard-working, effective employee for them. Mr. LaBonte deserves an apology, not further attack.
While TEAM takes shots at Mr. LaBonte and the court’s decision, Mr. LaBonte and the other fired workers, continue to suffer. Being disappointed or even angered by a court decision that does not go as you would hope, is understandable, but failing to learn, grow and change from it, is not. TEAM needs to rise up and be the employer it claims to be and take the hard steps necessary to assure that it does not devalue and discriminate against older workers.

Stephen W. Cooper, Esq.

The Cooper Law Firm, Chartered

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

RIGHT ON!!!!