Good news: Companies are starting to benefit from last year’s Supreme Court ruling on age discrimination.

To review the ruling: The High Court said employees can win age bias suits only if they prove age was the key motivator for their demotion or termination.

The issue was raised again in a recent case in Michigan.

The whole mess started after 65-year-old Harriet Schoonmaker was let go in a reduction-in-force.

The problem? Her company had opted to retain a 29-year-old employee in Schoonmaker’s department. Schoonmaker said the younger worker had been at the company half as long as she and had recently been disciplined for excessive absenteeism.

Manager admitted she was qualified, but …

In court, Schoonmaker’s manager said she was as qualified as the younger staff member, but felt Schoonmaker was harder to work with and not as productive as the 29-year-old employee.

The court sided with the employer. Schoonmaker couldn’t prove her age was the reason she was let go.

Furthermore, the court held that the company’s stated reasons for firing Schoonmaker – that she wasn’t as productive and was hard to work with – were valid and not cover-ups for age bias.

The lesson here: A mere age differential is not enough to prove age discrimination. The burden remains on employees to show that adverse employment actions against them were taken mainly because of their age.

Cite: Schoonmaker v. Spartan Graphics Leasing LLC