Robert Goldman v. First National Bank ( 1993 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion









    February 18, 1993 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

    ____________________

    No. 92-1773

    ROBERT GOLDMAN,

    Plaintiff, Appellant,

    v.

    FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BOSTON,

    Defendant, Appellee.

    ____________________


    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

    [Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
    ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Selya, Circuit Judge,
    _____________

    Higginbotham,* Senior Circuit Judge,
    ____________________

    and Cyr, Circuit Judge.
    _____________

    ____________________


    Denise M. Leydon with whom Weston, Patrick, Willard & Redding was
    ________________ __________________________________
    on brief for appellant.
    Richard P. Ward with whom Robert B. Gordon and Ropes & Gray were
    ________________ ________________ ____________
    on brief for appellee.


    ____________________

    February 18, 1993
    ____________________



    ____________________

    *Of the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.














    CYR, Circuit Judge. The First National Bank of Boston
    CYR, Circuit Judge.
    _____________

    terminated the employment of appellant Robert Goldman pursuant to

    a reduction in force in 1989. Goldman sued the Bank, asserting,

    inter alia, age discrimination in violation of 29 U.S.C. 621-
    _____ ____

    634 ("ADEA") and Mass. Gen. L. ch. 151B, and breach of a lifetime

    employment contract. The district court granted summary judgment

    in favor of the Bank. We affirm.



    I
    I

    BACKGROUND
    BACKGROUND
    __________


    In 1957 the Bank hired Robert Goldman as a clerk in its

    Settlement Department. Goldman recalls that Lee Beaulieu, the

    personnel officer who interviewed him for the job, told him at

    the time he was hired that he would not become wealthy working

    for the Bank, but would have a job for life unless he committed a

    criminal act against the Bank. Goldman also recalls that Beauli-

    eu said the Bank had never laid off an employee.2

    Over the ensuing thirty-two years, Goldman held various

    positions with the Bank. During the final four years, he worked

    as a Custody Administrator in the Custody Administration Unit of

    Capital Asset Services, a division of the Treasury and Banking

    Services Department, providing administrative services relating






    ____________________

    2Goldman recollects that similar representations were
    repeated by various supervisors throughout the course of his
    employment with the Bank.














    to the Bank's custodial security accounts.3

    In 1989, the Bank launched a large-scale reduction in

    its work force due to mounting losses in its Treasury and Banking

    Services operation. The Bank completely reorganized the Treasury

    and Banking Services Department, reconfiguring approximately 252

    operational functions into approximately 135 functions. As a

    result, 119 positions were eliminated. Thomas Keane, Senior

    Operations Manager of the Capital Asset Services Department,

    determined that it was necessary to eliminate three of the

    fifteen positions in the Custody Administration Unit.

    After reviewing recent employee performance evaluations

    and consulting with unit supervisors, Keane selected three

    employees for dismissal: a twenty-four year old, a thirty-seven

    year old, and Goldman, then fifty-two. Keane explained that the

    twenty-four year old was suspected of misusing a corporate credit

    card; the thirty-seven year old and Goldman were considered the


    ____________________

    3The Bank is a custodian of securities for various clients,
    including banks, insurance companies, colleges, and other insti-
    tutions.

    Custody Administrators provide necessary administrative
    services for the securities accounts of these clients,
    and their work involves settling trades according to
    client instructions and assuring the proper and accu-
    rate recording of transactions that affect these ac-
    counts. The Bank strives to be competitive in this
    business by having administrators who provide efficient
    customer service, and who communicate frequently with
    clients both to assure the accuracy of transactions and
    to address any potential problems with the administra-
    tion of their accounts.

    Affidavit of James W. Curran, Account Mgr., Custody Administra-
    tion Unit.

    3














    weakest performers in the unit. Keane represents that Goldman

    was responsible for the fewest customer accounts, with the lowest

    aggregate market value, and that Goldman's low volume resulted in

    large measure from the reassignment of some of Goldman's accounts

    due to client complaints. All three positions were permanently

    eliminated and Goldman's duties were absorbed by the remaining

    employees in the Custody Administration Unit.


    II
    II

    DISCUSSION
    DISCUSSION
    __________


    A. Summary Judgment Standard
    A. Summary Judgment Standard
    _________________________

    We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, employ-
    __ ____

    ing the same criteria incumbent upon the district court in the

    first instance. Pedraza v. Shell Oil Co., 942 F.2d 48, 50 (1st
    _______ _____________

    Cir. 1991), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S. Ct. 993 (1992).
    _____ ______

    Summary judgment is appropriate where the record, including the

    pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions on

    file, and affidavits, viewed in the light most favorable to the

    nonmoving party, reveals no genuine issue as to any material

    fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of

    law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Canal Ins. Co. v. Benner,
    ___ ______________ ______ __

    F.2d , (1st Cir. 1992), No. 92-1360, slip op. at 5 (1st
    ___ ____

    Cir. Nov. 24, 1992); see also Mesnick v. General Elec. Co., 950
    ___ ____ _______ _________________

    F.2d 816, 822 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.
    ____ ______

    Ct. 2965 (1992). The nonmoving party "may not rest upon the mere

    allegations or denials of the . . . pleadings, but . . . must set


    4














    forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for

    trial." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
    ___ ________ ______________

    Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1985). There is no trialworthy issue
    ____

    unless there is enough competent evidence to enable a finding

    favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. at 249 (citing First Nat'l
    ___ ___________

    Bank of Arizona v. Cities Service Co., 391 U.S. 253, 288-89
    _________________ ___________________

    (1968)). Moreover, "[e]ven in cases where elusive concepts such

    as motive or intent are at issue, summary judgment may be appro-

    priate if the nonmoving party rests merely upon conclusory

    allegations, improbable inferences, and unsupported speculation."

    Medina-Munoz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 896 F.2d 5, 8 (1st
    ____________ ___________________________

    Cir. 1990).


    B. Age Discrimination Claims4
    B. Age Discrimination Claims
    _________________________

    1. The Burden-Shifting Paradigm
    1. The Burden-Shifting Paradigm
    ____________________________

    A plaintiff alleging age discrimination "bears the

    ultimate 'burden of proving that his years were the determinative

    factor in his discharge, that is, that he would not have been

    ____________________

    4The complaint alleged parallel claims under the ADEA and
    its Massachusetts counterpart, Mass. Gen. L. ch. 151B. On
    appeal, Goldman asserts for the first time that Massachusetts
    applies a less onerous standard of proof to claims brought under
    the Massachusetts antidiscrimination statute than this court
    applies to ADEA claims, and that his Massachusetts claim there-
    fore must be addressed separately. Goldman's opposition to
    summary judgment did not distinguish between the federal and
    state age discrimination claims, and he relied solely on federal
    precedent. Consequently, the district court's analysis did not
    distinguish between the state and federal age discrimination
    claims. We follow suit, as "theories not raised squarely in the
    district court cannot be surfaced for the first time on appeal."
    McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st
    _____ _________________________________
    Cir. 1991), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S. Ct. 1939 (1992).
    ____ ______
    See Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 829 n.11.
    ___ _______

    5














    fired but for his age.'" Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 823 (quoting
    _______

    Freeman v. Package Machinery Co., 865 F.2d 1331, 1335 (1st Cir.
    _______ ______________________

    1988)). Absent direct evidence of age discrimination, the

    familiar burden-shifting framework established in McDonnell
    _________

    Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-805 (1973), comes into
    ______________ _____

    play. Lawrence v. Northrop Corp., ___ F.2d ___, ___ (1st Cir.
    ________ _______________

    1992), No. 92-1702, slip op. at 4 (1st Cir. Nov. 25, 1992);

    Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 823; Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 8. First,
    _______ ____________

    the plaintiff must make a prima facie showing of discrimination,

    McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802; Lawrence, slip op. at 4;
    __________________ ________

    Biggins v. Hazen Paper Co., 953 F.2d 1405, 1409 (1st Cir.), cert.
    _______ _______________ ____

    denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S. Ct. 3035 (1992) and cert. granted,
    ______ ____ _______

    ___ U.S. ___, 112 S. Ct. 2990 (1992); Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 823;
    _______

    that is, Goldman must demonstrate that he (1) was at least forty

    years of age, (2) met the employer's legitimate job performance

    expectations, (3) experienced adverse employment action, and (4)

    was replaced by a person with roughly equivalent job qualifica-

    tions. Id.; Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 8. A plaintiff whose
    ___ ____________

    employment was terminated in the course of a reduction in force

    need not demonstrate that he was replaced, but may show that "the
    ________

    employer did not treat age neutrally or that younger persons were

    retained in the same position." Hebert v. Mohawk Rubber Co., 872
    ______ _________________

    F.2d 1104, 1111 (1st Cir. 1989); see Lawrence, slip op. at 5;
    ___ ________

    Connell v. Bank of Boston, 924 F.2d 1169, 1173 n.5 (1st Cir.),
    _______ _______________

    cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S. Ct. 2828 (1991).
    _____ ______




    6














    "Establishment of the prima facie case . . . creates a

    presumption that the employer unlawfully discriminated against

    the employee," Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450
    _________________________________ _______

    U.S. 248, 254 (1981), and the burden of production shifts to the

    defendant-employer to "articulate some legitimate, nondis-

    criminatory reason" for the termination. McDonnell Douglas, 411
    _________________

    U.S. at 802; Lawrence, slip op. at 5; Biggins, 953 F.2d at 1409;
    ________ _______

    Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 823. The burden of persuasion remains with
    _______

    the plaintiff-employee at all times. Lawrence, slip op. at 5;
    ________

    Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 823 (citing Burdine, 450 U.S. at 253);
    _______ _______

    Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 9.
    ____________

    The presumption of unlawful age discrimination generat-

    ed by the plaintiff-employee's prima facie showing dissipates,

    however, provided the employer sustains its burden of production;

    the plaintiff-employee must then demonstrate that the proffered

    reason for the adverse employment action was simply a pretext for

    age discrimination. Lawrence, slip op. at 6; Mesnick, 950 F.2d
    ________ _______

    at 823; Connell, 924 F.2d at 1172. The plaintiff must do more
    _______

    than cast doubt on the employer's justification for the chal-

    lenged action; there must be a sufficient showing that discrimi-

    natory animus motivated the action. Lawrence, slip op. at 6-7;
    ________

    Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 824; Villanueva v. Wellesley College, 930
    _______ __________ _________________

    F.2d 124, 127-28 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.
    ____ ______

    Ct. 181 (1991); Connell, 924 F.2d at 1172. Direct or indirect
    _______

    evidence of discriminatory motive may do, but "the evidence as a

    whole . . . must be sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to


    7














    infer that the employer's decision was motivated by age animus."

    Connell, 924 F.2d at 1172 n.3; see also Lawrence, slip op. at 6-
    _______ ___ ____ ________

    7, Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 825; Villanueva, 930 F.2d at 128.
    _______ __________

    Under First Circuit caselaw, the plaintiff-employee

    must adduce minimally sufficient evidence of pretext and discrim-
    ___

    inatory animus. Lawrence, slip op. at 6-7 (citing Mesnick, 950
    ________ _______

    F.2d at 825; Villanueva, 930 F.2d at 127; Connell, 924 F.2d at
    __________ _______

    1172; Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 9; Olivera v. Nestle Puerto Rico,
    ____________ _______ ___________________

    Inc., 922 F.2d 43, 48 (1st Cir. 1990)). A showing that the
    ____

    employer's justification was not the actual motive may be enough

    if the facts and circumstances raise a reasonable inference of

    age discrimination. Connell, 924 F.2d at 1175. Nevertheless,
    _______

    the plaintiff-employee cannot avert summary judgment if the

    record is devoid of direct and circumstantial evidence of dis-
    ___

    criminatory animus on the part of the employer. Lawrence, slip
    ________

    op. at 6-7 n.1.5

    ____________________

    5Appellant argues that our cases place a more onerous burden
    on an ADEA plaintiff than that envisioned by the Supreme Court in
    McDonnell Douglas and Burdine. Accord Connell, 924 F.2d at 1183
    __________________ _______ ______ _______
    (Bownes, J., dissenting) (suggesting that Burdine permits a
    _______
    plaintiff to prove employment discrimination "either by direct
    ______
    evidence of discrimination or by successfully rebutting the
    __
    employer's articulated reasons."). We do not agree. Fed. R.
    Civ. P. 56 requires the nonmoving party to demonstrate the
    existence of a dispute of material fact; in order to do so,
    Goldman "must raise an inference of discriminatory motive under-
    lying the pretextual explanation." Villanueva, 930 F.2d at 128
    __________
    (citing Medina-Munoz, 896 F.2d at 9). It is not the province of
    ____________
    the courts to sit as "super personnel departments, assessing the
    merits or even the rationality of employers' nondis-
    criminatory business decisions." Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 825. "The
    _______
    'ADEA does not stop a company from discharging an employee for
    any reason (fair or unfair) or for no reason, so long as the
    decision to fire does not stem from the person's age.'" Id.
    ___
    (quoting Freeman v. Package Machinery Co., 865 F.2d 1331, 1341
    _______ _____________________

    8














    The Bank does not challenge the district court ruling

    that Goldman made out a prima facie age discrimination claim.

    Nor does Goldman challenge the finding that the Bank met its

    burden at the second stage of the McDonnell Douglas burden-
    __________________

    shifting analysis by articulating a nondiscriminatory motive for
    ____________

    Goldman's dismissal; namely, that economic considerations neces-

    sitated a reduction in force and Goldman was selected for termi-

    nation because he was "the weakest performer and least qualified

    employee" in his unit. At the third and final stage of the

    McDonnell Douglas analysis, the district court ruled that Goldman
    _________________

    had failed to present sufficient evidence either to rebut the

    Bank's proffered justification for Goldman's dismissal or to

    support an inference of discriminatory animus. The Bank accord-

    ingly won summary judgment on the state and federal age discrimi-

    nation claims. Contending that the district court weighed the

    competing evidence, rather than viewing it in the light most

    favorable to him, Goldman maintains that there is sufficient

    record evidence of pretext and age animus to clear the summary

    judgment hurdle.


    2. Evidence of Pretext
    2. Evidence of Pretext
    ___________________

    "In assessing pretext, [our] 'focus must be on the

    perception of the decisionmaker,' that is, whether the employer
    ________

    ____________________

    (1st Cir. 1988)). Since an employer's nondiscriminatory motiva-
    tions for adverse employment decisions are irrelevant in an age
    discrimination case, a "mere showing that the employer's articu-
    lated reason may shield another (possibly nondiscriminatory)
    reason does not create a dispute of material fact" sufficient to
    withstand summary judgment. Villanueva, 930 F.2d at 128.
    __________

    9














    believed its stated reason to be credible." Mesnick, 950 F.2d at
    _______

    824 (quoting Gray v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 792 F.2d 251,
    ____ ____________________________

    256 (1st Cir. 1986) (emphasis added)). Goldman does not dispute

    that the Bank effected the reduction in force in order to reduce

    costs. Instead, he argues that he produced enough evidence to

    rebut the Bank's contention that he was the weakest and least

    qualified employee in his unit. Goldman established that he had

    received merit salary increases on a regular basis throughout his

    tenure with the Bank, received commendations and accolades from

    Bank clients over the years, and received no warnings relating to

    his work performance. Although Goldman received mixed perfor-

    mance evaluations, he disputed their accuracy and fairness.

    Goldman presented substantial evidence that the Bank

    did not consider his work performance unsatisfactory in absolute

    terms. But the Bank consistently has maintained that Goldman was

    discharged strictly because he was the least qualified employee
    _____ _________

    in the Custody Administration Unit. It submitted comparative

    evidence as to the account workloads of all custody administra-

    tors in Goldman's unit. There is no dispute that Goldman, among

    all custody administrators, was responsible for the fewest

    accounts, having the lowest aggregate market value. In these

    circumstances, refutation of the proffered justification for

    Goldman's discharge required evidence from which the trier of

    fact reasonably could conclude that Goldman's abilities and

    qualifications were equal or superior to employees who were

    retained. As Goldman made no such evidentiary showing, whatever


    10














    slight shadow of doubt may have been cast upon the proffered

    justification for his dismissal is too faint to raise the spectre

    of pretext.
















































    11














    3. Evidence of Age Animus
    3. Evidence of Age Animus
    ______________________

    Evidence of age animus "need not be of the 'smoking

    gun' variety," but the totality of the circumstances must permit

    a reasonable inference that the employer's justification for the

    challenged action was a pretext for age discrimination. Connell,
    _______

    924 F.2d at 1175 (citing Burdine, 450 U.S. at 256). Goldman
    _______

    insists that several pieces of evidence, considered collectively

    or individually, support an inference of discriminatory animus on

    the part of the Bank.

    First, Goldman claims that discriminatory animus is infer-

    able from the affidavits of eight former Bank employees, each

    stating that the affiant was the eldest, or one of the eldest,

    employees in a particular unit at the Bank and was performing

    adequately when dismissed pursuant to the reduction in force.

    According to Goldman, the fact that several older, long-term

    employees with satisfactory performance records were terminated

    could lead a reasonable factfinder to conclude that Goldman would

    not have been terminated but for his age. On the contrary, as

    the district court observed, anecdotal evidence of this sort does

    little more than "corroborate what was undisputed: that members

    of the protected class were terminated as part of the [reduction

    in force]." Evidence that eight employees, among the 119 select-

    ed for dismissal, were among the eldest in their respective units

    does not give rise to a reasonable inference that older employees

    were disproportionately affected by the reduction in force, much
    __________________

    less that age discrimination motivated their dismissal.


    12














    Second, Goldman theorizes that the termination of

    older, more costly, employees would optimize the cost reductions

    achieved through the reduction in force. The implication,

    Goldman suggests, is that the Bank was biased against older

    employees in effecting the workforce reduction.6 Yet Goldman

    submitted no evidence either that older employees were more

    costly to the Bank than younger employees or that older employees

    were disproportionately affected by the reduction in force. See
    ___

    Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 822 (evidence presented by party opposing
    _______

    summary judgment "'cannot be conjectural or problematic'")

    (quoting Mack v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 871 F.2d 179, 181
    ____ ___________________________

    (1st Cir. 1989)).

    Third, Goldman contends that the Bank's introduction of

    a new retirement plan raised an inference of discriminatory

    animus. In 1989 the Bank replaced its pension plan with a new

    "Cash Balance" plan. The Bank informed its employees, at the

    time, that its objective was "to make the Bank's retirement

    benefits a visible, attractive benefit to our entire employee

    population regardless of age" and to "reward employees based


    ____________________

    6Goldman notes that 41% of the 119 employees terminated in
    May 1989 were over forty years of age, but that among the 21 ter-
    minated employees subsequently rehired, only 5, or 24%, were over
    forty. Statistical evidence that older employees were terminated
    at a disproportionate rate may provide strong evidence of age
    discrimination. See Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 824; Connell, 924 F.2d
    ___ _______ _______
    at 1177. However, the present record includes no evidence as to
    the age composition of the workforce subject to termination, or
    of the pool of applicants seeking reemployment, against which to
    compare the data Goldman cites. In fact, at oral argument
    Goldman disclaimed any statistical argument based on these
    incomplete data.

    13














    upon individual performance." Under the new plan, the Bank

    opened a "Cash Balance" account for each employee and credited

    the account annually with a percentage of the employee's sala-

    ry.7 After five years of service, all funds in the Cash Balance

    account may be withdrawn by employees who are no longer employed

    by the Bank. Goldman argues that the new plan favors younger

    employees and raises an inference of age animus because it

    requires the Bank to deposit a decreasing percentage of salary to

    the Cash Balance account as the employee reaches the upper

    service brackets and because its stated purpose is to make the

    plan more attractive to the 85% of Bank employees for whom the

    former pension plan represented "a benefit for the distant

    future."

    Goldman's argument is deficient, however, in that there

    is no evidentiary foundation for the premise that the new plan

    disadvantages older employees. The fact that the Bank contrib-

    utes decreasing percentages of salary to the Cash Balance account

    after the employee reaches the thirty-five year service threshold

    ____________________

    7The percentage of salary credited annually to the Cash
    Balance account depends on the number of years of service with
    the Bank:

    Percentage of Salary Credited
    Years of Service to Cash Balance Account
    ________________ ______________________________
    0 - 1 0%
    1 - 2 3.25%
    3 - 4 4%
    5 - 9 5%
    10 - 14 6%
    15 - 19 8%
    20 - 34 11%
    35 - 39 6%
    40+ 0%

    14














    is insufficient to create an inference of age animus absent

    evidence that the resulting retirement benefit would be lower

    than the benefit the employee would have received under the

    former plan. Moreover, Goldman's argument ignores the safeguards

    put in place by the Bank to ensure that employees fifty-five or

    older with ten years of service, or employees at any age with

    twenty years of service, would experience no reduction in bene-

    fits. When an employee in either of these service categories

    retires or leaves the Bank, benefits are calculated under both

    the old pension plan and the new Cash Balance plan; the employee

    is entitled to receive the greater benefit. Thus, these employ-

    ees cannot be disadvantaged by the introduction of the new

    plan.8

    These safeguards do not necessarily cover all employees

    in the protected class, however, as those between forty and

    fifty-five with less than twenty years of service and those

    fifty-five or older with less than ten years of service at the

    time the new plan became effective fall outside the scope of the

    safeguard provision. Rather, at retirement or termination, these

    employees receive benefits under both plans. The retirement

    benefit under the former plan is based upon the length of service

    as at December 31, 1988; under the new plan the benefit consists

    of the funds accumulated in the Cash Balance account after


    ____________________

    8Goldman argues that the safeguards would have been unneces-
    sary if the new plan did not deprive these employees of benefits
    to which they would have been entitled under the former plan.
    Clearly, Goldman's argument entirely ignores the safeguards.

    15














    December 31, 1988. Goldman has adduced no evidence, nor has he

    argued, that benefits calculated under these provisions are lower

    than those obtainable under the former pension plan for members

    of the protected class. Accordingly, no reasonable inference of

    age bias can be drawn on the present record.

    Finally, Goldman maintains that the Bank's decision to

    disband the "Quarter Century Club," a Bank-sponsored social

    organization for employees with twenty-five years or more of

    service,9 uniquely and adversely affected older employees and

    therefore is indicative of age bias. Goldman does not dispute

    that the Bank stopped funding the Quarter Century Club as part of

    its program to reduce discretionary costs. There is no direct

    evidence that considerations of age, as distinguished from

    neutral cost-saving considerations, entered into the decision to

    disband the organization, and the bare fact that the Bank stopped

    funding the Quarter Century Club to reduce costs clearly is

    insufficient to support a reasonable inference that Goldman's

    dismissal was motivated by age discrimination.

    Even viewed collectively, see Mesnick, 950 F.2d at 824
    ___ _______

    (citing Olivera, 922 F.2d at 50) (We do not "look at evidence of
    _______

    discrimination . . . in splendid isolation, but as part of an

    aggregate package of proof offered by the plaintiff."), the

    evidence was insufficient to enable a reasonable factfinder to

    ____________________

    9The record on appeal contains no evidence as to the bene-
    fits associated with Quarter Century Club membership. At oral
    argument, counsel allowed as how members received small gifts in
    recognition of their loyal service and were honored at an annual
    dinner.

    16














    infer that age discrimination motivated the Bank's decision to

    dismiss Goldman. Stripped of its speculative chaff, at best the

    record reveals that a small number of those discharged were among

    the older employees in their respective units, that the Bank

    implemented a new pension plan which has in no measure been shown

    to have been disadvantageous to older employees, and that the

    Bank stopped funding the Quarter Century Club. The gap between

    this evidence and an inference of age discrimination could only

    be bridged by impermissible inference. As Goldman established

    neither pretext nor age animus, the district court correctly

    granted summary judgment on the age discrimination claims.


    C. Breach of Lifetime Employment Contract
    C. Breach of Lifetime Employment Contract
    ______________________________________

    Goldman maintains that Lee Beaulieu, a personnel

    officer, offered him lifetime employment by representing that the

    Bank had never laid off employees and that Goldman would have a

    job for life unless he committed a criminal act against the

    Bank.10 Even though it is far from clear that the sort of

    representations made by Beaulieu import an oral offer of lifetime

    employment, for present purposes we assume as much arguendo.
    ________

    Under Massachusetts law, a lifetime employment contract

    cannot be found absent evidence that it was made or ratified by

    an officer or agent with actual or apparent authority to bind the

    employer to a lifetime contract. See Rydman v. Dennison Mfg.
    ___ ______ ______________

    Co., 373 Mass. 855, 366 N.E.2d 763 (1977); Porshin v. Snider, 349
    ___ _______ ______


    ____________________

    10Goldman had no written employment contract with the Bank.

    17














    Mass. 653, 654, 212 N.E.2d 216, 217 (1965); Thalin v. Friden
    ______ ______

    Calculating Mach. Co., 338 Mass. 67, 70, 153 N.E.2d 658, 660
    ______________________

    (1958); Simonelli v. Boston Hous. Auth., 334 Mass. 438, 440-41,
    _________ __________________

    137 N.E.2d 670, 672-73 (1956). As there is no evidence that the

    Bank invested Beaulieu with actual authority to extend a binding

    offer of lifetime employment to anyone, we need only determine

    whether Goldman has demonstrated a genuine factual dispute

    material to the issue of apparent authority.

    "Apparent or ostensible authority 'results from conduct

    by the principal which causes a third person reasonably to
    __ ___ _________

    believe that a particular person . . . has authority to enter

    into negotiations or to make representations as his agent.'"

    Hudson v. Massachusetts Property Ins. Underwriting Ass'n, 386
    ______ ________________________________________________

    Mass. 450, 457, 436 N.E.2d 155, 159 (1982) (quoting W. A. Seavey,

    Agency 8D at p. 13 (1964)) (emphasis added). "It is a 'fundam-
    ______

    ental rule that apparent authority cannot be established by the

    putative agent's own words or conduct, but only by the princi-
    ____ __ ___ _______

    pal.'" Sheinkopf v. Stone, 927 F.2d 1259, 1269 (1st Cir. 1991)
    ___ _________ _____

    (quoting Sheldon v. First Fed. Savings & Loan Ass'n, 566 F.2d
    _______ _________________________________

    805, 808 (1st Cir. 1977)) (emphasis added). We therefore examine

    the record for conduct on the part of the Bank that could have

    prompted Goldman reasonably to believe that Beaulieu was autho-

    rized to hire him as a lifetime Bank employee.

    A person appointed to a position with generally recog-

    nized functions may be found to possess apparent authority to

    perform the duties ordinarily entrusted to one occupying that


    18














    position. Restatement (Second) of Agency 27 cmt. a (1958).
    _______________________________

    Clearly, Beaulieu, a personnel officer, had either actual or

    apparent authority to hire Bank employees. Ordinary authority to

    hire, however, is insufficient to bind the employer to a lifetime

    employment contract. Boleman v. Congdon and Carpenter Co., 638
    _______ _________________________

    F.2d 2, 4 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 824 (1981) (applying
    ____ ______

    Massachusetts law). "[R]arely . . . [do] circumstances exist

    which would give rise to apparent authority, of even a principal

    corporate officer, to employ another for life." Thalin, 338
    ______

    Mass. at 70, 153 N.E.2d at 660; see Annotation, Power of Corpo-
    ___ ________________

    rate Officer or Agent to Hire Employees for Life, 28 A.L.R.2d
    ___________________________________________________

    929, 933 (stating that "[i]n the absence of express authority, it

    has generally been held or recognized that corporate officers or

    agents do not have the power or authority to hire employees for

    life").

    Goldman suggests that apparent authority should be

    inferred because his only contact at the time he was hired was

    with Beaulieu and he had no way of knowing that lifetime employ-

    ment contracts with the Bank were extraordinary. As the great

    weight of authority makes clear, however, a corporate personnel

    officer's general hiring authority does not suffice to establish

    apparent authority to bind the employer to a lifetime employment

    contract, irrespective of any awareness on the part of the

    employee that lifetime employment contracts with the employer

    were extraordinary. See Rydman, 373 Mass. at 855, 366 N.E.2d at
    ___ ______

    764 (suggesting that even explicit assurances by corporate


    19














    officers or agents do not bind a corporate employer to employment

    contracts of extraordinary duration unless the contract was

    either made or ratified by an officer with actual or apparent

    authority to so bind the corporation); Porshin, 349 Mass. at 654,
    _______

    212 N.E.2d at 217 (finding general manager's authority to hire

    and fire insufficient to "clothe him with ostensible authority to

    make a contract for permanent employment"); Simonelli, 334 Mass.
    _________

    at 440-41, 137 N.E.2d at 672 (finding assurances of lifetime

    employment made by personnel manager and project director insuf-

    ficient to create lifetime employment contract absent ratifica-

    tion by the employer); Braden v. Trustees of Phillips Academy,
    ______ _____________________________

    321 Mass. 53, 71 N.E.2d 765 (1947) (holding that comptroller had

    no authority to hire assistant comptroller for life absent

    conduct by employer that could have caused plaintiff-employee

    reasonably to believe the comptroller was authorized to offer

    lifetime employment). Holding Beaulieu out as its agent for

    general hiring purposes did not constitute conduct warranting an

    objectively reasonable belief that Beaulieu had Bank authority

    to hire anyone for life.

    Apparent authority to offer a binding lifetime employ-

    ment contract may be found in the rare circumstance where it is

    customary for a particular officer or agent to make such a

    lifetime contract. 28 A.L.R. 2d at 938. See Braden, 321 Mass. at
    ___ ______

    55, 71 N.E.2d at 766. The Bank submitted competent affidavits

    attesting that Beaulieu had no actual authority to bind the Bank

    to a lifetime employment contract and that no employee has a
    __ ________


    20














    lifetime contract with the Bank. Goldman suggests, however, that

    an inference that lifetime employment contracts were commonplace

    at the Bank can be drawn from the assurances of Beaulieu and

    several supervisors that he had a job for life and that no

    employee had ever been laid off.

    "Lifetime contracts are extraordinary in their nature

    and strong proof is required to establish their due formation."

    Gregory v. Raytheon Serv. Co., 27 Mass. App. Ct. 1170, 1171, 540
    _______ __________________

    N.E.2d 694, 695 (1989); accord Boleman, 638 F.2d at 4 (finding a
    ______ _______

    putative lifetime employment contract "well within the category

    of extraordinary agreements requiring the strongest proof of

    authority by the one making it to bind a corporate employer").

    Although widespread knowledge that the Bank had never laid off an

    employee except for criminal conduct might prompt the legitimate

    belief that employment at the Bank was relatively secure, it

    cannot be considered competent proof, let alone "strong proof,"

    Gregory, 27 Mass. App. Ct. at 1171, 540 N.E.2d at 695, that any
    _______

    Bank employee had a lifetime employment contract. Absent evi-

    dence of any lifetime employment contract with the Bank at any

    level under any circumstances we must conclude that a rational

    factfinder could not reasonably find that lifetime employment

    contracts with the Bank were customary.

    Although Goldman failed to generate a trialworthy issue

    as to whether Beaulieu possessed apparent authority to offer

    lifetime Bank employment, we must still consider whether any

    officer, with authority to bind the Bank, subsequently ratified
    ____


    21














    Beaulieu's unauthorized offer of lifetime employment. See
    ___

    Restatement (Second) of Agency 82 (1958); 28 A.L.R. at 938-40;
    ______________________________

    Rydman, 373 Mass. at 855, 366 N.E.2d at 764; Simonelli, 334 Mass.
    ______ _________

    at 441, 137 N.E.2d at 672.

    Goldman attests that the concept of lifetime employment

    was reinforced by various supervisors throughout his tenure at

    the Bank. Ratification is not established, however, unless the

    subsequent assurances were made by one with actual or apparent

    authority to bind the Bank to a lifetime employment contract.

    See Rydman, 373 Mass. at 855, 366 N.E.2d at 764; Restatement
    ___ ______ ___________

    (Second) of Agency 93 cmt. c (1958). As the record contains no
    __________________

    evidence that any supervisor who represented that Goldman was

    employed for life had actual or apparent authority to determine

    the terms of Goldman's employment contract, much less bind the

    Bank to a lifetime contract, no trialworthy issue was raised

    relating to the ratification claim.11

    As Goldman generated no trialworthy issue relating to

    the lifetime employment contract claim, summary judgment was

    proper.

    Affirmed.
    Affirmed.
    ________




    ____________________

    11The Bank's pre-1989 practice of not discharging employees
    except for criminal conduct is entirely consistent with universal
    at-will employment and does not constitute affirmance of a
    lifetime contract. See Restatement (Second) of Agency 93
    ___ ________________________________
    (1953) ("affirmance can be established by any conduct of the
    purported principal manifesting that he consents to be a party to
    the transaction, or by conduct justifiable only if there is
    ratification").

    22







Document Info

Docket Number: 92-1773

Filed Date: 2/18/1993

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/21/2015

Authorities (21)

52 Fair empl.prac.cas. 253, 52 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,659 ... , 896 F.2d 5 ( 1990 )

Alice Sheldon v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association ... , 566 F.2d 805 ( 1977 )

Thomasina Mack v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea ... , 871 F.2d 179 ( 1989 )

Warren B. Sheinkopf v. John K.P. Stone Iii, Etc. , 927 F.2d 1259 ( 1991 )

Tino Villanueva v. Wellesley College , 930 F.2d 124 ( 1991 )

Walter F. Biggins v. The Hazen Paper Company, Walter F. ... , 953 F.2d 1405 ( 1992 )

40-fair-emplpraccas-1597-41-empl-prac-dec-p-36451-irving-p-gray-v , 792 F.2d 251 ( 1986 )

Andrew P. Hebert v. The Mohawk Rubber Company , 872 F.2d 1104 ( 1989 )

Samuel Mesnick v. General Electric Company , 950 F.2d 816 ( 1991 )

49 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1139, 48 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 38,456, ... , 865 F.2d 1331 ( 1988 )

John J. Boleman v. The Congdon and Carpenter Company , 638 F.2d 2 ( 1981 )

Thomas B. Connell v. Bank of Boston and John S. Ingalls , 924 F.2d 1169 ( 1991 )

James L. McCoy Administrator of the Electrical Workers ... , 950 F.2d 13 ( 1991 )

cruz-pedraza-alejandrina-pedraza-roberto-pedraza-and-mary-ellen-pedraza , 942 F.2d 48 ( 1991 )

Hudson v. Massachusetts Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'... , 386 Mass. 450 ( 1982 )

Porshin v. Snider , 349 Mass. 653 ( 1965 )

Thalin v. FRIDEN CALCULATING MACHINE CO. INC. , 338 Mass. 67 ( 1958 )

Simonelli v. Boston Housing Authority , 334 Mass. 438 ( 1956 )

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 93 S. Ct. 1817 ( 1973 )

Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine , 101 S. Ct. 1089 ( 1981 )

View All Authorities »