ADEA Violation – Sufficiency of Evidence

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Romuald Tyburski v. City of Chicago

Case No.: 18-3000

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and SYKES and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges.

Focus: ADEA Violation – Sufficiency of Evidence

In 2014, Romuald (“Roman”) Tyburski, then age seventy-four, applied for a promotion with his employer, the City of Chicago’s Department of Water Management, but the City rejected his application. Tyburski sued, claiming that the City denied him the promotion because of his age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634. He also brought a hostile work environment claim under the ADEA regarding harassment he allegedly experienced at two Department of Water Management facilities: Central Park Pumping Station (“Central Park”) and Jardine Water Purification Plant (“Jardine”). The district court ultimately granted summary judgment in favor of the City.

Tyburski has not supplied evidence showing that his age, rather than his failing score on the requisite verbal exam, was the reason he missed out on the desired promotion. Furthermore, assuming a hostile work environment claim is cognizable under the ADEA, Tyburski failed to present sufficient evidence for a factfinder to conclude that the purported harassment he experienced was severe or pervasive. And Tyburski failed to exhaust this claim regarding conduct that allegedly occurred at Jardine, as he did not file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) reporting that conduct. Summary judgment was therefore appropriate, and we affirm.

Affirmed

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.