A plaintiff establishes pretext through evidence that the stated reason has no basis in fact, did not actually motivate the decision, or was insufficient to motivate it. Shifting explanations and comparator evidence are common proof.
Disbelief of the reason may permit but does not compel an inference of discrimination.
Alternative Names:
Pretext for Discrimination, Pretextual Reason
Why it Matters?
Shifting or inconsistent explanations are the most damaging pretext evidence, since an employer that gave one reason at termination, another to the agency, and a third in litigation has supplied the plaintiff's case. Consistency across the personnel file, the position statement, and deposition testimony is what prevents that. The honest belief rule protects a reason the employer genuinely held even if factually mistaken.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
What is the most damaging pretext evidence?
Does the honest belief rule help?
