Sybase - Legal Issues in the Case, Court Decisions

Business Brief

Robert Senske was terminated in 2005 from the company, Sybase which is a system administration and Software Company based out of Chicago, Illinois. This case, which was tried in 2009 in the 7th, ruled in favor of the defendant, Sybase. The plaintiff, Robert Senske claims that he was terminated from the defending company because of his age. The defendants were able to prove that the termination was not because of Senke's age, but many factors relating to his job performance.

Legal issues in the case, Court decisions

The legal issue in this case was whether or not Senske was terminated because of his age, in which he was 58 in 2005. Senske claims that the defendants did not hold the younger associates to the same level that they held him. The company responded with the fact the younger associates were considered lower ranking, which comes with less responsibility. In Senske's role as a Strategic Account Manager 2, he was considered a senior level associate. Senske also argued that he should not be terminated for poor performance in regards to attendance, professionalism and carelessness because he had exceeded his sales goal and was invited to join the company's President's Club, which is exclusively for associates who exceed their sales goal. The court, with overwhelming evidence ruled in favor of the defendant and declared that Senske was not terminated because of his age and that his high sales earnings did not overshadow his shortcomings.

Performance Criteria

The plaintiff was being judged under the criteria on his actual performance reviews- performance, pipeline of potential revenue, follow through and paperwork. He was also being judged by management and clients on his timeliness, ability to work as a team player, closing strategies, communication and inability to follow newly established processes and procedures. When Roeder (Senke's manager),wrote his recommendation for Senske's termination to human resources he had done so after placing the employee on a performance improvement plan, where improvements were not made. Senske wanted to say his high performance in revenue should overshadow these performance issues but the fact is that Senske was attached to these deals but did not actual work during the merger processes.

Evaluation

Senske was only top earner in the year 2004 when he exceeded his goal by 86%. This alone made his evaluation have the overall score of "good". In years past, when Senske was far below his annual goal, his overall score was "marginal". While the overall score may be different, there are striking similarities in re occurring categories. In the paperwork and pipeline categories, Senske continually