Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment — sex discrimination

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 4, 2014//

Employment — sex discrimination

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 4, 2014//

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Employment — sex discrimination

Where an employee did not have the qualifications that her male counterparts had, the delay in promoting her was not sex discrimination.

“But Frankiewicz and Zastrow both differ in significant ways from Langenbach. Frankiewicz has a special skill — the ‘lost art’ of meat cutting — that uniquely qualified him to become an Assistant Manager heading up the meat department. He also had three years of management experience at a local Piggly Wiggly before starting work at Wal-Mart. Langenbach does not allege that she also had such qualifications. Likewise, Zastrow had two years of community college experience, which alone allowed him to meet the minimum requirements for the Assistant Manager position. Langenbach has no education past a high school diploma. Differences in experience, education, and qualifications are relevant to the similarly-situated analysis so long as the employer took them into account when making the relevant employer decisions. Patterson v. Avery Dennison Corp., 281 F.3d 676, 680 (7th Cir. 2002). Wal-Mart’s minimum requirements for the Assistant Manager position depend heavily on schooling and experience. We do not think, given these significant differences, that a reasonable fact-finder would find Frankiewicz or Zastrow an adequate comparator for Langenbach.”

Affirmed.

14-1022 Langenbach v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Joseph, Mag. J., Kanne, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests