CSX. But Beal failed to rebut Convergys’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the adverse employment acts, including that Beal performed unsatisfactorily by failing to meet her sales goals and by recording customer calls contrary to company policy. Here, Beal does not dispute that she failed to meet her sales goals. Nor does she present evidence supporting her assertion that she received reprimands from Convergys mainly or just to thwart her career advancement. Because Beal did not demonstrate that Convergys’s proffered reasons were not the “real” reasons for the adverse employment acts, or that the real reason was discriminatory animus against her, she failed to establish pretext. See St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502, 515, 113 S.Ct. 2742, 2752, 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). For the foregoing
holding that an employee may establish that the legitimate reason for an employment decision offered by an employer is pretextual by showing by a preponderance of the evidence either that the discrim inatory reason was the true reason motivating the employers conduct or that the profferred legitimate reason was false holding that woman has constitutionally protected right to determine for any reason or no reason to terminate her pregnancy holding that a plaintiff may rely on the same evidence to prove both pretext and discrimination holding that the plaintiffs argument rebutting the defendants legitimate nondiscriminatory reason on the plaintiffs discrimination claim also rebutted the defendants reason on the plaintiffs retaliation claim because they were the same holding that a reason cannot be proved to be a pretext for discrimination  unless it is shown both that the reason was false and that discrimination was the real reason