Bryan v. Gov't of the V.I.

916 F.3d 242 (2019) United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2019-02-19

civil; ADEA disparate treatment and disparate impact (class action); judgment for government employer on a stipulated record in a bifurcated liability trial affirmed by CA3 (result: claimant-lost)

Facts

  1. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment not law
    And although an employer may not use a direct proxy for age to discriminate surreptitiously against older workers, an employee's tenure (without more) is not such a direct proxy.
  2. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment not law
    VIESA does not discuss age or any stereotypes based on age.
  3. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment not law
    But while it is true that every Government employee with thirty years of service is over 40 (because the Government does not hire nine-year-olds), Bryan and Thomas point to nothing in the record to establish that all System members in the protected class have achieved thirty years of credited service.
  4. 4 Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment not law
    In sum, because Section 7(k) was motivated by factors other than age-factors that are not direct proxies for age-it does not violate the ADEA's bar on disparate treatment.
  5. 8 Reasonable factors other than age satisfied law
    VIESA sought to reduce government spending by reducing payroll while continuing to provide necessary public services.
  6. 8 Reasonable factors other than age satisfied law
    A reasonable, non-age factor that explains an employer's decision therefore precludes disparate impact liability, Smith , 544 U.S. at 239, 125 S.Ct. 1536, and the burden is on the employer to demonstrate the factor's reasonableness, Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Lab. , 554 U.S. 84, 91, 128 S.Ct. 2395, 171 L.Ed.2d 283 (2008).
  7. 8 Reasonable factors other than age satisfied law
    Because Section 7(k)'s cost-savings justification was reasonable, the Government is entitled to the RFOA defense.
  8. 8 Reasonable factors other than age satisfied law
    Using the increased contribution to encourage employees to retire from the Government payroll directly reduces costs as those retirees cease to draw Government salaries and begin to draw pensions from the System.
  9. 8 Reasonable factors other than age satisfied law
    Although the contribution does not result in direct cost-savings for the Government because the System is a separate fisc, the 3% contribution does lower costs for that System-to which the Government must contribute directly to prevent insolvency.