PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Jury rules in favor of Chiefs for age discrimination case


ShowtimeSBMVP
03-06-2013, 02:16 PM
KCTV5 - Kansas City ‏@KCTV5

Jury rules in favor of Chiefs for age discrimination case http://bit.ly/YYSOSM


A Jackson County jury ruled early Wednesday afternoon in favor of the Kansas City Chiefs in a civil age discrimination case.

The jury finished deliberation about 1:45 p.m. , deciding if a former Chiefs employee was wrongfully fired because of his age.

The trial began last month in the Independence courthouse.

Steven Cox, now 63, was maintenance manager for the Chiefs. He says he was fired two years ago because of his age. He is seeking nearly $500,000 in damages plus back pay and benefits in addition to punitive damages.

Former Chiefs general manager Scott ***** and his testimony play a key role in the case.

Cox was employee of the month in 2009 and received glowing performance reviews. He contends he was fired so that a man in his 30s, who is a relative of a front office executive, could be hired.

Owner Clark Hunt thanked Cox for his 12 years of service in a letter shared with the jury. The Chiefs say Cox was fired because he raised a janitor's pay by $5,000 even though he did not have the authority to do so and was told not to.

"They presented not one shred of evidence that the Chiefs terminated this man based on his age," Chiefs attorney Tony Romano said.

He said the claims could not be substantiated and the attorneys "haven't fooled you and pulled the wool over your eyes by invoking sympathy."

Lewis Galloway, Cox's attorney, told jurors to send Hunt a message.

"You can tell him that what happened to Steve Cox was wrong and you knew it. And they all knew it, and Steve Cox should never had to go through this whole miserable process in order to prove it," Galloway said.

Jurors ended their deliberations at 5 p.m. Tuesday without a decision. They resumed deliberations Wednesday morning.

Sorter
03-06-2013, 02:17 PM
:(

Imon Yourside
03-06-2013, 02:20 PM
Thanks Pissoli!

bowener
03-06-2013, 02:20 PM
Fuck ***** with a hot poker.

Do you think Pioli has notches on his bed post so that he can masturbate to the number of lives that he has personally ruined?

RealSNR
03-06-2013, 02:22 PM
Shucks. It would have been hilarious if the jury ruled the other way and if this was reported on Pioli's NFL Network show while he was on it.

"Going around the league now... the Chiefs will owe a settlement to a maintenance manager who was fired due to age discrimination. Scott Pioli is believed to be the person who spearheaded the firing. Scott, that guy probably had a wife and kids. Why are you such a fucking asshole?"

Rasputin
03-06-2013, 02:23 PM
Took them long enough to deliberate. That shows in itself that something just wasn't right about them being fired imo. Fuck Scott fucktard Pioli.

DJ's left nut
03-06-2013, 02:23 PM
Damn?

Or not?

Ultimately it wouldn't have been Pioli footing the bill here; it would've been the Chiefs and Clark Hunt. I think Clark's done enough good stuff lately that I'm not really rooting against him anymore.

And Pioli was already exposed as a megalomaniacal clown anyway, so I'm not sure a verdict one way or the other changes that.

Sucks for the folks that got fired...but I don't know any of those guys. So in the end, I guess I don't really care.

ChiefsCountry
03-06-2013, 02:24 PM
I think they have another one to go.

Dark Horse
03-06-2013, 02:24 PM
Plaintiffs attorney "Old people while slow and dangerous behind the wheel can still serve a purpose".

SAUTO
03-06-2013, 02:27 PM
if he raised someone's pay and was told not to he should have been fired

silver5liter
03-06-2013, 02:28 PM
Thanks obama

OrtonsPiercedTaint
03-06-2013, 02:38 PM
Was the janitor's 5k for workman's comp? Hurting his back picking up....ya know...

durtyrute
03-06-2013, 02:42 PM
It is not too often a person basically sues a billion dollar organization and wins.

L.A. Chieffan
03-06-2013, 02:44 PM
Pioli finally won something

HemiEd
03-06-2013, 02:48 PM
Well now we know who was responsible for picking up the candy wrapper.


That should have set a strong example!

Marcellus
03-06-2013, 02:51 PM
Pioli was a world class prick we all know this but I don't think Clark would be ok with firing people due to age etc....

bowener
03-06-2013, 02:58 PM
***** finally won something

/thread

Sweet Daddy Hate
03-06-2013, 03:07 PM
Damn?

Or not?

Ultimately it wouldn't have been Pioli footing the bill here; it would've been the Chiefs and Clark Hunt. I think Clark's done enough good stuff lately that I'm not really rooting against him anymore.

And Pioli was already exposed as a megalomaniacal clown anyway, so I'm not sure a verdict one way or the other changes that.

Sucks for the folks that got fired...but I don't know any of those guys. So in the end, I guess I don't really care.

Sadly, this.
Posted via Mobile Device

LoneWolf
03-06-2013, 04:09 PM
If one of my direct reports gave someone in their dept. a 5k raise without approval, I'd fire their ass also. Sure Pioli is a dick, but this sounds like it was justified.

TEX
03-06-2013, 04:25 PM
If one of my direct reports gave someone in their dept. a 5k raise without approval, I'd fire their ass also. Sure ***** is a dick, but this sounds like it was justified.

Exactly.

Chiefs316
03-06-2013, 04:28 PM
Plaintiffs attorney "Old people while slow and dangerous behind the wheel can still serve a purpose".

LOL, and I am listening to Jim Cary stand up while I lurk the forums.

Frosty
03-06-2013, 04:32 PM
Their choice to be old.

Garcia Bronco
03-06-2013, 06:49 PM
It's still dirty that the dude had a great Perf Review and then get's fired for a relative. It ain't illegal, but it outta be.

SAUTO
03-06-2013, 07:04 PM
It's still dirty that the dude had a great Perf Review and then get's fired for a relative. It ain't illegal, but it outta be.

Did you read the article?

He was fired for giving someone a raise when told not to.
Posted via Mobile Device