Opinion ID: 41382
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: ANM Position

Text: Emory concedes that Saunders established a prima facie case with respect to the Acting Nurse Manager (ANM) position. Emory has proferred a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its decision, namely that the interview panelists for the position unanimously rated Sampsel higher based on her better communication and leadership skills and because she lacked the disciplinary record that Saunders had amassed. Saunders claims the disparity in qualifications between herself and Sampsel and Emory’s failure to follow its hiring policies demonstrate that Emory’s proferred reason is pretextual. “[A] reason is not pretext for discrimination unless it is shown both that the reason was false, and that discrimination was the real reason.” Springer v. Convergys Customer Mgmt. Group Inc., 509 F.3d 1344, 1349 (11th Cir. 2007) (internal quotation marks omitted). In the context of promotions, we have held that “a plaintiff must show that the disparities between the successful applicant’s and his own qualifications were ‘of such weight and significance that no reasonable 8 person, in the exercise of impartial judgment, could have chosen the candidate selected over the plaintiff.’” Id. (quoting Cooper v. Southern Co., 390 F.3d 695, 732 (11th Cir. 2004)). “Standing alone, deviation from a company policy does not demonstrate discriminatory animus.” Mitchell v. USBI Co., 186 F.3d 1352, 135556 (11th Cir. 1999). Saunders has failed to demonstrate that Emory’s proferred reason is pretextual. Emory’s decision to waive the minimum years of clinical experience requirement in Sampsel’s favor and to prefer Sampsel over Saunders in spite of the fact that Saunders had more clinical experience was reasonable in light of the evidence showing that Sampsel was better qualified in terms of communication, leadership, and workplace behavior, skills of great importance in a management position. Therefore, Saunders has failed to demonstrate that Emory’s proferred reason is false. Moreover, Saunders has failed to produce any evidence indicating that discrimination was the actual reason behind the decision to hire Sampsel.