Opinion ID: 2974335
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Overall’s Failure-to-Hire Claim

Text: In a disparate-treatment case such as this, where a plaintiff claims he was not hired because of racial discrimination, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case under a slightly modified version of the burden-shifting approach adopted by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). See Fuhr v. Sch. Dist. of Hazel Park, 364 F.3d 753, 758 (6th Cir. 2004). To make out a prima facie case, Overall must show that (1) he is a member of a protected class, (2) he applied for and did not receive the job at issue, (3) he was qualified for the job, and (4) similarly situated persons not in his class received the job for which he applied. Anthony v. BTR Auto. Sealing Sys., Inc., 339 F.3d 506, 514 (6th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted). Additionally, in a failure-to-hire case, a plaintiff must show that “the defendant continued to accept applicants for the position from equally qualified persons.” Christopher v. Stouder Mem'l Hosp., 936 F.2d 870, 879 (6th Cir. 1991) (citing McDonnell Douglas Corp., 411 U.S. at 802). If a plaintiff satisfies these -4- No. 05-4520 Overall v. RadioShack Corp. prongs, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that it had a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for failing to hire the plaintiff. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 411 U.S. at 804. If the employer articulates such a reason, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that this reason is pretextual. Id. A failure to establish any one element of the prima facie case is sufficient to grant summary judgment in favor of RadioShack. Here, because we conclude that Overall’s claim fails on the third element, we need not address the rest of the McDonnel Douglas test. To show that he was qualified for the sales associate position, Overall must present “credible evidence that his . . . qualifications are at least equivalent to the minimum objective criteria required for employment in the relevant field.” Wexler v. White’s Fine Furniture, Inc., 317 F.3d 564, 576 (6th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Although the district court found that there was a triable issue as to whether Overall was qualified for the position, we conclude otherwise. The job description for RadioShack sales associates provides, under the heading “Knowledge and Skill Requirements,” that a “[h]igh school diploma or equivalent” is required. (Joint Appendix 133.) Further, RadioShack presented deposition testimony and affidavits from three RadioShack managers describing a RadioShack policy requiring all sales associates over the age of eighteen to have a high school diploma or general equivalency degree (“GED”). Consistent with this policy, everyone hired at the Boulevard store during the 2002 Golden Quarter had a high school diploma or GED. At the time Overall sought employment with RadioShack as a sales associate, he was over the age of eighteen but possessed neither a high school diploma nor a GED. Thus, under -5- No. 05-4520 Overall v. RadioShack Corp. RadioShack policy, Overall lacked a necessary qualification required for employment as a sales associate. The district court, however, concluded that Overall presented sufficient evidence to create a triable issue regarding RadioShack’s actual hiring practices. The district court found persuasive the following facts: (1) RadioShack’s website did not reference a general requirement of a high school diploma or GED for the sales associate position but did expressly state such a requirement for the “Manager in Training” position; and (2) RadioShack regularly hired people under the age of eighteen who did not possess a high school diploma or equivalent. These facts do not adequately rebut RadioShack’s evidence that Overall was not qualified for the sales associate position. First, Overall has only shown that RadioShack’s website spells out a more expansive list of requirements for the “Manager in Training” position than the sales associate position. Overall has not presented any evidence to refute RadioShack’s proffered testimony that persons over the age of eighteen must possess a high school diploma or GED to be hired, nor has he shown a single instance where RadioShack did not follow its hiring rule. Second, Overall interprets RadioShack’s practice of hiring people under the age of eighteen, who lack a high school diploma or GED, as meaning that RadioShack does not actually have a hiring policy requiring sales associates over the age of eighteen to possess one. Overall’s inference goes too far. The more reasonable explanation is that RadioShack’s strict education requirement is relaxed for employees who are under the age of eighteen. This naturally follows when one considers that the vast majority of people under the age of eighteen are still in high school, which would, unsurprisingly, make it impossible for them to have a high school diploma or GED. -6- No. 05-4520 Overall v. RadioShack Corp. In October 2002, it is undisputed that Overall was over the age of eighteen and had neither a high school diploma nor a GED. The evidence in the record shows that RadioShack did not consider Overall qualified for a sales associate position, and, therefore, even if Taylor had accepted Overall’s completed employment application, Overall would not have been hired. Overall has not presented any evidence to refute RadioShack’s evidence establishing a hiring policy that required all sales associates over the age of eighteen to possess a high school diploma or GED. Therefore, the district court properly granted summary judgment for RadioShack based on Overall’s failure to establish a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether he was qualified for the sales associate position. Because resolution of this question is sufficient to grant summary judgment in favor of RadioShack, we do not reach the question of whether Overall actually applied for the position at issue.