Cox's duties included interviewing, training and supervising 9 full-time employees, all of whom worked in the accounting firm's front office. Her performance reviews for 1990, 1992 and 1993 rated her as "good" or "very good," but they also contained criticisms of her strained relationships with front office staff. At least by 1993, Cox concedes that she became "anxious, irritable and nervous" and that the work atmosphere became "tense and stressful." That same year, an employee supervised by Cox complained about Cox' management of the front office. In 1994, employees of the front office accused Cox of perpetuating a "personality conflict" with one of the employees, Ms. Ault, causing additional hostility and defensiveness on Cox' part.

In 1995, in the context of Cox' application for a loan, the firm's managing partner, Andrew Vogel III, told the loan officer that Cox' job was secure. Vogel said of course her job was secure because "she's our office manager." That same year, however, the firm decided to eliminate the front officer manager position and terminate Cox' employment. The partners concluded that Ms. Warren, a 35-year-old partner in the firm, could supervise the front office without the firm incurring the costs of employing an office manager. Rhonda Wolfe, a 23-year-old proofreader whom Cox had trained as her back-up, the firm decided, would assist Ms. Warren. On May 26, 1995, the firm informed Cox of the firm's decision and of her immediate termination. Cox was paid her usual annual bonus plus accrued vacation pay.

The firm's employee handbook contained an "at will" provision stating that the firm did not guarantee employment and that employees could be terminated at any time at the option of the company. Another part of the handbook instructed employees who resign to give the company at least 2 weeks notice.

After Cox' termination, Warren assigned some of Cox' non- supervisory duties to various staff members, but most of Cox' duties were assumed by Warren or Wolfe. The firm never hired another office manager, and morale and productivity in the front office improved following Cox' firing.

Cox sued her ex-employer claiming age discrimination in violation of the ADEA. She also sued the firm for breach of contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress, claiming her firing breached the company's promise of secure employment and the manner of the termination caused her emotional distress.

The district court ruled in favor of the employer that Cox did not present evidence sufficient to support either her age discrimination or other claims. The court applied an analysis known as "McDonnell Douglas" and found that Cox met her initial burden of proof under the ADEA, because she showed she was over 40 years old at the time of her firing, that she was qualified for the office manager job, and that her duties remained after her position was eliminated and were assumed by Warren (age 35) and Wolfe (age 23). The court found, however, that the firm provided a non-discriminatory reason for eliminating Cox' position, i.e., that a partner could provide the supervision without sustaining the expense of employing an office manager, and that elimination of the position elevated morale in the office.

The court said Cox failed to produce any evidence showing that the firm's reason was a pretext for discrimination based on age. Although Cox argued that it was incredible that a manager was not needed and to assume that staff could supervise themselves, the court said that was not the case; in reality, the employees would still be supervised by a partner, and the firm would simply save money by eliminating the manager position.

(Cox v. Vogel, Civil Action No. 97-3906, 1998 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 11586 (E.D.Pa. July 30, 1998). 24 pages.)

Attorneys not listed.