what is there to show the showing was that at the time of the terminations the preceding we have valuation which occurred in may of one thousand nine hundred nine some six months before the actual terminations i see did have a satisfactory  if she had eleven or twelve years of being an assistant manager and getting good evaluations then i could see that argument but i don't in the context of the particular case maybe explain it and maybe not all of this is before and the beginning of her sort of slide backwards in terms of her evaluations he started in october of ninety seven and over that time between october of ninety seven to january two thousand that's when these these sort of  and i believe the district judge thought it could just as well be a reference to money because she was drawing a high rate she could be replaced with that less expensive people after all they hired people who are close to her age group please her i believe that the people that they hired are actually the of communications i think which she was trying to do was speak their own pragmatic terms of you know they're going to bring it back to me anyway and besides the problems between you and i let's let's have to stop here and now and get this taken care of  you know that i have no i don't i don't know why i'm concerned about it less experienced employees as well wal mart hires all these old people you can have somebody seventy years old in their brand new low paid employee and so i don't know if less experienced and younger means the same thing and i want to know when she was questioned about it at her deposition she quoted the remark the same way i don't you know i don't recall if she was questioned in that  like the subordinate said may i use i want to use the open door policy because of the supervisor's own experience or bad experience in using the open door policy the supervisor said go ahead and try it but it's going to wind up back here at me tempted to dissuade the employee from utilizing her rights to greek this is the last straw in a series of employment related problems in one nine hundred ninety eight the appellant was warned here they said next time you have an employment probably maybe terminated on the fourth strike when she barred the door for the remedy then she was terminated not three strikes and you're out before strikes  agent by being called a dumb mexican was a direct causal have direct causal effect to the employment in bomb when it was hiring another female employee in the statement was the supervisor didn't want to deal with another female in that case the apple he relies on the employment decision that was made i think the court was with him the salient point to talk about the age of the people who were hired and i think one thing you need to know that wal mart but one thing you need to also remember that the person that was hired was one of fifteen assistant managers and wal mart doesn't concede that the person that was hired the male that the appellant a person who is her replacement he's just another one of fifteen fifteen assistant managers in a particular was ready for a promotion and it was an opening to show low arizona and the geographic proximity merited him going there there was a mistake and the statement that was made consul didn't intend to say that but i think you heard earlier that the only remedy that the employee had she barked the door to the point that the employee was been struck that is a serious that is a serious employment problem and when it is the fourth strike it was terminations she was not notified of the reason for terminations being because of poor performance at the time of the firing wal mart parker because of this alleged open door policy violation the it's not as bad as or agrees it says that the mexican comment but it certainly is at least as bad as i can't work with another woman comment when of when an employee is told by her supervisor that she can be replaced by