A judge said Monday he is inclined to order a former director of business and legal affairs at FremantleMedia North America Inc. to arbitrate his claims that he was wrongfully terminated because of his age and replaced with a younger worker, but the judge did not immediately rule.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dean J. Kitchens instead took plaintiff Brian Hawk’s case under submission. Hawk’s lawsuit alleges discrimination, harassment, whistleblower retaliation, failure to prevent discrimination, harassment or retaliation, breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress as well as discrimination and harassment on the basis of sex and gender.
Fremantle is a British television and production company that has distributed American game shows locally in the U.S. and worldwide. Fremantle attorneys argue that Hawk is bound by a November 2019 employment agreement to take his claims before an arbitrator rather than a jury.
But in their court papers, Hawk’s attorneys maintain, among other things, that the arbitration clause in Hawk’s employment agreement was unduly favorable to Fremantle because the plaintiff was required to sign it as a condition of his employment.
In his tentative ruling, the judge viewed the arbitration clause differently.
“Plaintiff does not point to any other facts indicating the agreement’s surprisingness or oppressiveness,” the judge wrote in his tentative ruling.
Hawk was hired in October 2019. He is more than 40 years old, but the suit does not state his precise age at the time of his 2024 termination.
Hawk was assigned a new supervisor in October 2021 who regularly commented that she preferred younger workers, the suit states.
“These comments ostracized Hawk and made him feel unwelcome in the workplace,” the suit originally filed Jan. 15 states.
Two years later, the supervisor prevented Hawk and his team from attending an international business affairs and legal conference, further leading the plaintiff — the oldest member of his team — to believe his presence on the job was not appreciated, the suit states.
A few months later, a memo was sent out that, by its description of Hawk’s job duties, appeared to be a demotion, the suit states. A “shocked” Hawk inquired with a human resources representative to find out why, but got no answer, so he then questioned his supervisor, who also was dismissive of his inquiry, according to the suit.
A new supervisor assigned to oversee Hawk in November 2023 micromanaged him and limited his job duties while also showing kinder treatment to younger workers, the suit alleges.
Before he was terminated in March 2024, yet another supervisor told Hawk that she needed “a machine,” which he believed alluded to her believe he was unable to work as fast as more youthful employees, the suit states.