Eleventh Circuit Upholds Summary Judgment for Employer on Sex Discrimination Claims Regarding Severance Payments
By: Aaron Chaet
On May 26, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (“Eleventh Circuit”)FN1 upheld the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Airbus Defense & Space Inc. (“Airbus”) and denying three former female employees’ sex discrimination claim.FN2 The plaintiffs alleged that Airbus’s refusal to pay severance was sex discrimination because they were denied severance whereas the male employees were not.
The plaintiffs worked at Airbus’s facility located in Huntsville, Alabama to service a ten-year government contract to deliver helicopters. As the contract was ending, Airbus transitioned the remaining projects in Huntsville to an affiliate company, Airbus Helicopters, Inc. (“AHI”), which had several locations throughout the south. Airbus either offered employees substantially similar positions or a severance payment. However, for the employee to be offered severance payment, he or she must have been offered a position at AHI that met one of the three following conditions: (1) the job required an immediate change in location; (2) the job included substantially lesser pay; or (3) the job constituted substantially lesser status.
Airbus laid off thirteen employees but offered the three plaintiffs substantially similar positions at AHI which permitted them to remain in Huntsville for twelve months but would later require relocation. The plaintiffs, however, rejected the positions because they did not want to move away from Huntsville. Consistent with the factors identified above, the plaintiffs were not offered severance. Because no female employees received severance, they alleged that Airbus’s decision constituted sex discrimination.
In affirming the district court’s decision granting Airbus’s motion for summary judgment, the Eleventh Circuit noted that the plaintiffs did not present any evidence demonstrating that similarly situated male comparators were offered similar positions, refused those positions, and then was offered severance. The appellate court also emphasized that evidence supported Airbus’s legitimate business decision, that it complied with the terms it outlined to its employees regarding severance, and that the plaintiffs simply did not meet Airbus’s stated criteria.
Takeaway
Employers should be cognizant that awarding severance packages, even when not required, may trigger discrimination liabilities. As a result, interested employers should contact the attorneys at Campbell Litigation for an evaluation whether their severance package proposals comply with federal and state discrimination laws.
FN1 - The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has jurisdiction over federal appeals arising from the states of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida.
FN2- Johnson et al. v. Airbus Defense & Space Inc., Case No. 20-11424 (11th Cir. 2021) (unpublished)