Former principal wins appeal in suit against TPS

Former Tecumseh High School (THS) Principal Robert Scheick won an appeal in his lawsuit against Tecumseh Public Schools (TPS) and Professional Education Services Group (PESG) last week in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District. Scheick alleges that his contract was not renewed because of his age, filing an age discrimination lawsuit against TPS and PEGS.Scheick, who was originally employed directly by TPS, retired and joined PESG in 2007, which allowed him to receive full retirement benefits while still working for TPS without the district having to pay him benefits like healthcare. This allowed the district to save $29,487 in the first year alone, according to court documents.On February 25, 2010, Scheick, then 56, had his first formal evaluation. Scheick alleged former TPS Supt. Mike McAran said that the board “wanted to hire somebody and to put them in the high school for one to two years to get acquainted with the school district and then they would put him as superintendent.” Scheick alleged McAran told him the board wanted him to retire. McAran testified that he used Scheick’s evaluation as a “steppingstone” to end the district’s relationship with Scheick, noting several instances where Scheick did not perform to the district’s standards. McAran did say during his deposition that he characterized Scheick as having “highly effective performance” in areas of general administration and personal skills and characteristics, and “good, competent performance” for his supervision of personnel. However, McAran did note Scheick as needing “slight improvement to meet standard” for areas of community and student relations, supervision, and curriculum instruction. On March 8, 2010, Scheick alleged McAran told him “they wanted somebody younger.” McAran disputes that statement.In addition, sometime in March 2010, the idea was presented to combine the superintendent and principal roles at the high school to save money in the face of falling state aid and enrollment. McAran testified that the decision to terminate Scheick “had nothing to do with the finances of the school.”Scheick eventually filed suit, alleging TPS and PESG violated The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled that Scheick cannot establish his age discrimination claim through circumstantial evidence, granting TPS’s and PEGS’s motion for summary judgment. Upon review, the appellate court ruled that the district court had erred in concluding that McAran’s statement to Scheick that “they just want somebody younger” did not constituted direct evidence of age discrimination. The appellate court cited the comments made by McAran are almost identical to evidence in Sharp v. Aker Plant Services Group, which was ruled as direct evidence of age discrimination. Court documents continue saying, “The district court further erred when it applied a burden-shifting analysis in context of the plaintiff’s direct evidence argument, and in otherwise relying upon outdated ADEA precedent that has been superseded by the Supreme Court’s decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.” In a summary judgment, according to the appeals court, the plaintiff’s burden is to present sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that age was not only a motivating factor, but was the but-for cause of contested employment action. An AEDA plaintiff may prove age discrimination through direct or circumstantial evidence, the court defining direct evidence as evidence “which is probative of an alleged fact without requiring further inference.” The appeals court stated that cost savings played no role in the district’s decision to terminate Scheick, and that the but-for cause of the Scheick’s termination was exactly as McAran stated — the school board wanted “somebody younger.”The court concluded that the decision be reversed and remand the matter for trial, stating that Scheick met his burden to present his evidence. The new ruling allows Scheick to makes his case at trial.