A recent federal appeals court decision in an age discrimination case against Trader Joe’s has arguably established an “apples to apples” standard for employee comparisons in discrimination lawsuits.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld summary judgment for Trader Joe’s in a case involving Gloria Cocuzzo, a former employee who was terminated after purchasing beer for her underage grandson. Cocuzzo, who was 77 at the time of the infraction, claimed age discrimination and pointed to younger employees who received lesser punishment for alcohol-related missteps.
The court, however, ruled that such comparisons must be precisely matched.
“None of the individuals Cocuzzo identifies are true ‘apples to apples’ comparators such that their dissimilar treatment could support an inference of discrimination,” wrote Judge Kermit V. Lipez in the court’s opinion.
In Cocuzzo’s case, five of the younger employees she cited as comparators had received written warnings for failing to check customer ID’s – conduct the court viewed as fundamentally different from knowingly purchasing alcohol for a minor. A sixth employee who sold alcohol to an underage coworker was also not comparable because they reportedly did not know the coworker was underage.
Timothy J. Perry, Cocuzzo’s attorney, expressed concern about the precedent.
“For any plaintiff trying to find comparators, it will be very difficult going forward because the decision signals that comparators must be almost identical,” he said.
Notably, Cocuzzo appeared to have had an exemplary employment record prior to the infraction, described as “outstanding” and a “true neighborhood icon” in performance reviews. Legal analysts say that record may have worked against her, as Cocuzzo could not present evidence of supervisor animus or bias.
Previously, local news outlets took up Cocuzzo’s story, describing her as a “George Bailey” and “source of light and life” in the store. A GoFundMe campaign, launched in 2021, raised nearly $52,000 on Cocuzzo’s behalf.