Discussion 4 Case Discussion Select a case from either Chapter 12 (Age Discrimination) or Chapter 13 (Disability Discrimination) of Employment Law for Business. Answer the case questions. In your answer be sure to include the case title, page number from the text, and the questions from the case in your response.

Gross V. FBL Financial Services, Inc. 557 US. 167 (S. CT. 2009)

Gross began working for FBL in 1971 in 1971 in 2003 when Gross was 54, he was reassigned from his position as claims administration director to the position of claims project coordinator. His previous position was renamed to claims administration manager and was given to a younger employee whom Gross had previously supervised. Although his pay remained the same, Gross considered the changed a demotion and sue FBL for age discrimination. Gross introduced evidence at trial that decision was a least partly based on age. FBL's defense was the move was part of a restructuring and that the new position was a better fit for gross's skills. The trial court gave the jury an instruction that it should find for Gross if it foud that AGE was a motivation factor. IF It also instructed the Jury that it should find for FBL if it found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that FBL would have demoted him regardless of age. The jury found in Gross's favor and FBL appealed. The 8 Circuit reversed the decision and sent the case back for trial. The U.S. Supreme Court reviews the 8th Circuit's ruling.

CASE QUESTIONS

1-Do you agree with the dissent that the majority opinion in Gross completely alters the burden-shifting framework adopted n Prince Waterhouse?

2- In the Gross opinion likely to make recovery by employees more difficult in age discrimination cases, as many commentators has suggested?

3-Appellate court decisions subsequent to Gross have drawn a distinction between a burden of proof, which does not shift, and a burden of production, which does not shift, and a burden of production, which does. In your opinion, what is the difference and how is it relevant to the employee's age discrimination case?