Facts

Estella Butler and Phil Fikes sued Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and Ronald Young, in connection with their employment with the District. Butler dropped out of the case after she settled with defendants.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that he started working for the District in 1987. Defendant Young was the general manager of the Water Employees Service Authority. Plaintiff alleged that he was a member of the union and even served on the union's board. In 2011, while serving as a union board member, he assisted co-workers with their grievances against their employers, and has had to deal with Young in the process. Plaintiff alleged that Young often refused to address the grievances, necessitating him to go directly to the District's Board of Directors. Plaintiff alleged that defendants were not happy that he did so, which ultimately led to his firing. Plaintiff alleged that he was fired in 2012 because of his age and also for engaging in protected speech during union negotiations. As such, plaintiff alleged he was wrongfully terminated.

Plaintiff asserted claims for age discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, wrongful termination under FEHA, and violation of his constitutional free speech under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied that plaintiffs' separation was unlawful or had any connection to age, union affiliation or other protected classification. Defendants contended that plaintiffs, along with several other employees, were laid off due to legitimate business considerations in the course of a district-wide reorganization. Defendants contended that the allegations of discrimination and retaliation were without merit. Defendants also contended plaintiffs failed to exhaust all available administrative remedies, but specifically those available through the Public Employee Relations Board.

Defendants moved for summary judgment on all such grounds.

Result

While the court rejected defendants' exhaustion argument, it did grant their motion for summary judgment on the merits. First, the court concluded that Fikes failed to make a prima facie case of age discrimination under FEHA. The court likewise found that Fikes failed to meet his burden to prove his other claims. Thus, it granted defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Nov. 1, 2012.