Molson Coors judged a 58-year-old director unfit for his job's replacement before posting it, suit says

The complaint puts the judgment on the director's fitness three days ahead of the job posting. According to the filing, his supervisor and an HR representative called him into the Milwaukee office on February 17, 2025, and told him two things: the company was cutting his position and February 28 would be his final day, and he did not have what was needed for a new "Director Logistics - Beyond Beer" role that had not yet been posted ^[7]. That left 11 days between notice and departure ^[12]. A senior supply-chain officer announced the new role and his exit that afternoon. The internal posting went up on February 20 ^[8].

Molson Coors's stated reason, as the complaint records it, was his lack of "CHEP pallet and direct-to-consumer or e-commerce experience" ^[16]. On its face that is a defensible requirement for a job tied to the company's expansion beyond beer ^[11]. The complaint's answer is that he had worked with CHEP pallet systems and direct-to-retail distribution at a previous employer, and that his existing job already included non-alcoholic distribution ^[16][15]. The company interviewed four of 161 applicants, or 2.5 per cent ^[10][13]. He applied and was not among them ^[9].

The performance file is mixed, and the part that counts against him rests on style. The complaint cites favorable ratings from 2020 through 2022, a peer-nominated "Partner of the Year" award, and a supervisor who praised his financial and operational results in the January 2025 year-end review ^[5]. The same review rated him "Developing" for the second year running, based on what the filing calls "unspecified subjective perceptions of working style" ^[6].

The severance dispute followed. He signed the proposed release on March 3, 2025 ^[19]. On March 6, inside the seven-day revocation window and before the release became binding, the company withdrew it, the complaint alleges ^[19]. The same day it reclassified his separation as misconduct-based, pulling $87,094.80 in severance along with his incentive payout and extended health coverage ^[17]. The company accused him of improperly printing and emailing company information. He says he gathered records at the direction of Molson Coors's own Ethics and Compliance investigators, and sent his employment and separation documents to his personal email to consult outside counsel, as the severance agreement had encouraged ^[18]. He revoked his signature on March 9 ^[19].

The sex-discrimination count leans on the company's own paperwork. The complaint says Molson Coors set targets between 2022 and 2024 to raise female representation, including in supply chain, and wrote them into planning materials and his own performance goals ^[1]. One 2024 goal called for "increased participation by qualified persons of color and women in Distribution," according to the filing ^[1]. It also says he spoke privately to his supervisor about that push before the February 2025 decisions ^[2].

For an operator planning a restructuring, the trade-off is speed against the record. Settling the incumbent's fit before a posting exists saves a selection round. It also fixes a conclusion in a dated meeting, and the later search through 161 applications then has to support it ^[7][10]. Where the old job and the new one share distribution strategy, third-party logistics and cost reduction, the displaced incumbent is the obvious comparator for whoever is hired ^[15]. Every account here comes from the complaint, and the hiring figures come from its summary of the EEOC proceedings ^[3][10]. The February 2025 meeting reached a federal docket about 20 months later ^[14].