Employer Fires 61-year-old Employee Allegedly Because He “Won’t Be Part Of The Long-Term Plan.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Employee Files Lawsuit against Perfect Smile Dental Group for Age and Gender Discrimination

Vincent started as a front desk employee at Perfect Smile Dental Group in 2012, but he was quickly promoted to the office manager. In 2015, the company reassigned Vincent to a different location allegedly because his management style would benefit that location. Six months later, Vincent’s location was purchased by a new doctor, who worked very closely with Becky, an office manager at another location.

As far as Vincent knew, Becky had not been transferred to his location, but she was often there. Her official capacity was unclear, and Vincent recalls that he was given no direction about her role in the office. Within that first month, Becky held a meeting with Vincent’s direct supervisor while Vincent was at a doctor’s appointment. Becky allegedly informed Vincent that they had discussed how he needed to “soften his management style.” Naturally, this surprised him, and Vincent explained to Becky that he had been assigned to this location specifically because of his management style.

Becky allegedly replied, “You’re a man. You don’t know anything about this. It’s a woman thing.”Earlier in December, Becky conducted interviews for a front desk assistant for the location that Vincent managed, and she informed every applicant that they would report to Vincent. Over the Christmas holidays, Vincent called into the office to check on how things were running to discover that his supervisor had been terminated. Vincent returned from his supervisor-approved holiday leave to find that Becky was at the office. When Vincent asked why she was in, she explained that the office needed to be redecorated. Vincent asked why he hadn’t been included in the planned shopping trip, and Becky allegedly replied, “You’re a man. You don’t know anything about this. It’s a woman thing.”

Vincent arrived at the office on one of the last days of the year to work through some end-of-the-year responsibilities. That day, a female employee informed Vincent that Becky was going to have a talk with both of them. While Becky talked to the female behind a closed door, she talked to Vincent with the door open, allegedly saying, “a month ago you said you were going to retire…since you won’t be a part of the long-term plan, we’re going to let you go now.” Vincent tried to explain that he never said he was planning on retiring, but Becky ignored it, saying, “I’ve hired a woman with experience who is very excited to come in and grow with the practice.”

Later, Vincent found out that the new employee was in her mid-thirties. Vincent believes that he experienced age and gender discrimination while working for Perfect Smile Dental Group. No employee should deal with age or gender discrimination. KM&A strives to stand up against the injustice that employees like Vincent have experienced.

Full text of this complaint, as filed with the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, is available at docket no: 2:17-cv-01095-LPL

Kraemer, Manes & Associates LLC is an employment law firm with principal offices in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, serving all counties in Pennsylvania, focusing on employment law, business law, litigation, and civil issues. KM&A clients include employees, small businesses, parties in litigation, and people with a variety of legal issues.

For more information about this case, contact Attorney Kayla Drum at 412-626-5594 or at kd@lawkm.com.

NOTICE: All information contained in this statement comes from the Complaint which has been filed as a public record with the court. As dedicated civil rights attorneys, we strongly believe in the public value of telling our clients’ stories: violators can be held accountable, and other silent victims can feel empowered to stand up for their legal rights. Although we make every attempt to verify our clients’ claims, note that the defendant is expected to oppose our client’s position, and the court has not ruled one way or the other as of the date of this statement.