And the burro goes to ... fashion company that feds say didn't like the old look
Watchdog has’t had a Burro candidate so far this year, but then came Tandy Brands and we started dusting off the donkey pics.
And away we go: A Dallas fashion accessory designer recently learned the hard way that “out with the old” can cost big bucks. Tandy Brands Accessories will pay $95,000 to settle an age discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Tandy Brands' code of conduct states the company will promote "honest and ethical conduct.”
What it didn’t promote was older workers.Those they fired, the EEOC says.
A call to the company seeking comment wasn't immediately returned.
But their website offers this description of their people: "We are cut from leather, and like leather we are strong, versatile and enduring."
It's just some people look, you know, a little too leathery.
The EEOC suit began after a 62-year old manager was terminated because of her age, supposedly as part of a “reduction-in-force,” according to the EEOC suit.
As Donkey would say, “Come on Shrek, isn’t that just, what do you call it, happenstance?”
Alas, little Donkey, the EEOC investigated and found that within four months, Tandy Brands terminated another five supervisors ranging in age from 58 to 75, at its Victoria, Texas, facility. The company retained only two supervisors in the relevant location, both of whom were in their early 40s.
Age discrimination against persons age 40 and over violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Senior Trial Attorney Connie Wilhite, who handled the case for the EEOC, said, “A company cannot avoid a claim of age discrimination by replacing a 62-year-old with a 40-something if age is the motivating factor.
"Although the younger person is within the protected class under the ADEA, the fact that he is much younger than the displaced person can and often does signal the company’s intent to discriminate based on age. That is what happened in this case.”
