Advertisement

May 19, 2013

EEOC Sues Kanbar Property Management for Age Discrimination

Long-Time Property Manager for Downtown Tulsa Skyscrapers Booted for ‘Younger, Prettier’ Replacements, Federal Agency Charges

TULSA, Okla. – Kanbar Property Management LLC (KPM), which manages several down­town Tulsa commercial office buildings, violated federal law by terminating one of its long-time and well-qualified property managers because of her age, 53, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.

According to the EEOC’s suit, KPM informed Toni Strength that “due to a reorganization of services, it has become necessary to reduce the administrative management staff” and that her property manager position had been “eliminated effective October 29, 2010.” Two days later, after its supposed restructuring, KPM replaced Toni Strength with two new property managers, ages 23 and 39, because its chief operating officer wanted “younger and prettier” property managers to meet and entertain potential tenants after business hours.

Such alleged conduct violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which makes it unlawful to discharge any employee over the age of 40 because of age. The EEOC filed its lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (EEOC v. Kanbar Property Management LLC, Civil Case No.: 12-CV- ________) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The EEOC’s suit seeks back pay, liquidated damages and reinstatement or front pay for Strength as well as injunctive relief, including a court order prohibiting KPM from any further discrimination against employees on the basis of their age.

“KPM used the deception of a purported reorganization to mask its discriminatory plan to fire a qualified long-term older employee and replace her with ‘younger and prettier’ property managers,” said EEOC trial attorney Jeff Lee. “This litigation will serve notice to employers and KPM that the EEOC will not allow Oklahoma employees to be discarded once they reach a perceived expiration date in their 50s.”

Barbara A. Seely, regional attorney of the EEOC’s St. Louis District Office, which oversees Oklahoma, added, “Federal law has long prohibited employers from discriminating against employees who are over 40 years of age. The level of deceit practiced by KPM, as reflected in the plan to replace Ms. Strength with two younger employees, clearly demonstrates Kanbar Property Management’s willful intent to circumvent discrimination law – and it won’t work.”

According to company information, Kanbar Property Management LLC manages more than two million square feet of office space in downtown Tulsa. In fact, KPM parent company Kanbar Properties Inc. holds more than 30 percent of downtown Tulsa in its commercial portfolio, including First Place Tower, the Petroleum Club Building and the Bank of America Tower.

© Copyright 2012 - U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

About the Author

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

Most employers with at least 15...

800-669-4000

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.