Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. No. 84 C 7999, James B. Moran, Judge.
Before Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge, Hon. JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge, Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge
On consideration of the petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc filed in the above-entitled cause, no judge in active service has requested a vote thereon and all of the judges on the original panel have voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the aforesaid petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc be, and the same are, hereby DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the opinion issued in this case on September 27, 1988, is hereby AMENDED to reflect the following corrections:
(1) On page 3, the first line in the first full paragraph, the word "John" is changed to "Jon."
(2) On page 7, twelfth line in the first full paragraph, the word "[Spitz]" is changed to "[Ward]".
(3) On Page 10, first line of the first paragraph, the balance of the paragraph commencing with the word "It" is deleted and the following is added:
Although Ward's deposition testimony indicates that he thought Grohs was 54, not 51, at the time he was terminated, it thus seems unlikely that Ward thought someone even six years his senior was too old. It is true that Jon Roth, who was 43 at the time, was hired in spite of his people problems. As plaintiff points out in his brief, however, Roth was hired as a supervisor because he was the union president. In a supervisory capacity, Roth could not act on behalf of the union, and the company would have an easier time achieving decertification. This is consistent with Gold Bond's new 90-day strategy, rather than constituting evidence of age discrimination. n.5 [Footnote Omitted]