Sears accused of age discrimination
A former Sears employee is suing over claims of age discrimination.
John Ng-A-Mann filed suit in the U.S. Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division on Feb. 27 naming Sears Roebuck and Co. as the sole defendant.
According to Ng-A-Mann, he was an employee at Sears in the Deerbrook Mall from 2000 to 2013. Ng-A-Mann was born in 1941 and claims he was the victim of age discrimination in the workplace.
Ng-A-Mann says he was the oldest commissioned salesperson at his store when he was fired. He goes on to say Sears placed him under a new manager in early 2013 who slashed Ng-A-Mann work hours which in turn cut into his commissions.
Ng-A-Mann claims Sears had a practice of allowing salespeople to use spare coupons to help close transactions with customers. The managers at Sears had apparently witnessed salespeople use and trade coupons with regularity. However, in June 2013 Ng-A-Mann claims a company investigator employed by Sears confronted him about using the coupons and told Ng-A-Mann that it was "coupon fraud."
The investigator allegedly told Ng-A-Mann that if he signed a confession he would only receive a warning. Instead, Sears allegedly used the confession as grounds to fire Ng-A-Mann.
Ng-A-Mann believes he was fired from Sears because of his age. He says he received numerous awards from Sears commending him on his work record. Ng-A-Mann was replaced by a younger employee, according to the filing, which would potentially violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Ng-A-Mann is seeking an undisclosed amount in damages.
He is being represented by Houston attorney David C. Holmes.U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division Case No. 14-cv-488 This is a report on a civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division. The details in this report come from an original complaint filed by a plaintiff. Please note, a complaint represents an accusation by a private individual, not the government. It is not an indication of guilt, and it only represents one side of the story.