Evans v. Staples, Inc.

375 F. Supp. 3d 117 (2019) United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts 2019-04-22

civil; pro se Title VII race-discrimination (disparate treatment) claim by a temporary worker; Rule 12(b)(6) motion granted as to the individual supervisor and denied as to Staples (D. Mass.); state c. 151B claims dismissed as time-barred (result: mixed)

Facts

  1. 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization satisfied pleaded
    On April 13, 2015, Kforce Professional Staffing ("Kforce") placed Plaintiff in a temporary assignment with Staples to assist Ms. Dagg's project team with clean-up of procurement databases.
  2. 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not law
    Title VII does not provide for individual employee liability.
  3. 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not law
    Ms. Dagg was an employee of Staples and not Plaintiff's employer.
  4. 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not law
    Accordingly, Plaintiff's Title VII claims against Ms. Dagg are dismissed.
  5. 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization satisfied pleaded
    Her employer took an adverse action against her by terminating her employment earlier than expected.
  6. 2 Protected trait: race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy/abortion), or national origin satisfied pleaded
    When she began her employment, and Ms. Dagg learned Plaintiff's race, Plaintiff was placed at a "countertop space" to work with the only other person of color in the office even though there were several cubicles available.
  7. 2 Protected trait: race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy/abortion), or national origin satisfied pleaded
    Plaintiff is a member of a protected class.
  8. 3 Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations satisfied pleaded
    Plaintiff was initially interviewed for the position over the phone by Ms. Dagg.
  9. 3 Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations satisfied pleaded
    On May 22, 2015, Ms. Dagg terminated Plaintiff's contract, purportedly due to her lack of technical skills.
  10. 3 Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations satisfied pleaded
    It is plausible that she was qualified for her position since Ms. Dagg hired her after reviewing her credentials and conducting a phone interview.
  11. 4 Adverse employment action affecting compensation, terms, conditions, privileges, or status satisfied pleaded
    According to Plaintiff, this assignment was meant to end in August 2015.
  12. 4 Adverse employment action affecting compensation, terms, conditions, privileges, or status satisfied pleaded
    Her employer took an adverse action against her by terminating her employment earlier than expected.
  13. 5 Discriminatory causation ("because of" protected trait) satisfied pleaded
    Finally, Plaintiff alleges that after Ms. Dagg learned her race, she was ostracized in the office.
  14. 5 Discriminatory causation ("because of" protected trait) satisfied pleaded
    Her emails were ignored, she was never trained to do her job, and she was made to work in a separate and smaller workspace.
  15. 5 Discriminatory causation ("because of" protected trait) satisfied pleaded
    Taking these allegations as true, it is plausible that Plaintiff was treated differently, and ultimately fired, because of her race.
  16. 5 Discriminatory causation ("because of" protected trait) satisfied pleaded
    At this stage, a "plaintiff must allege a series of facts which at the very least gives rise to an inference of discriminatory animus."