The landmark case that made it more difficult for workers to prove age bias in the workplace is headed back to court.

You may recall the story: Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that a 54-year-old man had to prove that age bias was the sole reason his employer demoted him – and not just one of several factors, which is the standard applied in lawsuits concerning other forms of discrimination.

Improper jury instructions

A quick look at the details of the case: Jack Gross was a claims administration director for an Iowa insurance and financial services firm. After he was demoted, he sued his employer, alleging the action had been taken on account of his age.

A jury awarded him about $47,000 in lost compensation. But then the Supreme Court issued its decision, and the case went back to the lower court.

The appeals court judge ordered a new trial. The reason: In the first case, the jury had been instructed to decide whether age bias had been among the reasons the company demoted Gross.

Whatever the outcome of the new trial, it isn’t likely the end of the story.

Last October, Congressional Democrats proposed the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act (POWDA). The bill, which would ease employees’ burden of proof in age discrimination cases, is currently at the committee stage.

Cite: Gross v. FBL Financial Services