Weir v. Seabury & Smith, Inc.
2:13-cv-14329
E.D. Mich.Jun 16, 2015Background
- Debra Weir, a 56‑year‑old long‑time Marsh call center manager (Dearborn), was terminated effective Aug. 31, 2012, after a reorganization that hired a 33‑year‑old, Nick Carlson, as a single CCMII to oversee all three call centers.
- Weir had strong performance reviews and extensive insurance licensing and compliance experience; Marsh operated two Iowa centers (Urbandale, Newton) and one in Dearborn.
- Weir repeatedly raised compliance concerns (agents sharing credentials, selling without proper state licenses/appointments) from about 2006 through 2012; compliance investigations occurred and processes were revised.
- In May–July 2012, Marsh management (Seifert, then new head Cheryl Paine) planned a reorganization: Paine proposed eliminating both CCMII positions and hiring Carlson as a single CCMII; the change produced minimal projected savings and resulted in Weir’s termination while Gonzalez (younger CCMII) was reassigned/demoted but not fired.
- Weir sued for age discrimination under the ADEA and Michigan ELCRA and for wrongful discharge in violation of Michigan public policy (refusal to violate the Insurance Code). The court considered Marsh’s motion for summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Weir established a prima facie ADEA claim / replacement vs RIF | Weir says she was replaced by younger hire (Carlson), so not a bona fide RIF | Marsh contends this was a reorganization / RIF combining two roles into one | Court: disputed fact exists; a reasonable jury could find Weir was replaced and not part of a true RIF—prima facie satisfied |
| Whether Marsh articulated a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason and whether it was pretext | Weir argues timing, minimal savings, hiring of younger outsider, differential treatment of Gonzalez, and lack of posted openings show pretext | Marsh says termination resulted from legitimate reorganization and operational concerns | Court: Marsh proffered a nondiscriminatory reason but material disputes (timing, savings, treatment, posting) permit a jury to find pretext; ADEA claim survived summary judgment |
| Whether ELCRA claim fails or survives given causation standard | Weir argues Michigan law requires only that age be a motivating/substantial factor | Marsh relies on ADEA standard and the reorganization justification | Held: ELCRA claim survives (lower causation standard than ADEA); jury could find age was a substantial/motivating factor |
| Whether Weir states a wrongful‑discharge‑in‑violation‑of‑public‑policy claim for refusing to violate Insurance Code | Weir says she was fired for refusing to permit credential sharing and unlawful sales | Marsh says no evidence she was instructed to break law; her reports were investigated and addressed | Held: Claim fails as a matter of law—record lacks causal connection that refusal to violate law was determinative; summary judgment granted on public policy claim |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (Sup. Ct. 1973) (framework for burden‑shifting in circumstantial discrimination claims)
- Gross v. FBL Financial Servs., Inc., 557 U.S. 167 (Sup. Ct. 2009) (ADEA requires but‑for causation)
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (Sup. Ct. 2000) (prima facie case plus evidence discrediting employer’s reason may permit finding of discrimination)
- Barnes v. GenCorp Inc., 896 F.2d 1457 (6th Cir. 1990) (definition of true RIF and replacement analysis)
- Grosjean v. First Energy Corp., 349 F.3d 332 (6th Cir. 2003) (employee replacement analysis and age‑difference considerations)
- Geiger v. Tower Automotive, 579 F.3d 614 (6th Cir. 2009) (applying McDonnell Douglas in ADEA context)
- Morrison v. B. Braun Medical Inc., 663 F.3d 251 (6th Cir. 2011) (public‑policy discharge claims require causal connection between protected conduct and discharge)