Sacchi v. Ihc Health Servs., Inc.
civil; Title VII sex and religious discrimination (with ADA and ADEA claims) by an unpaid hospital intern; Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal for lack of employee status affirmed (10th Cir.) (result: claimant-lost)
Facts
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
Relevant to this appeal, Ms. Sacchi received no direct payment or other benefits for her work as an intern.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
The Hospital's internship program is designed to satisfy the clinical experience requirement, and the program is accredited and recognized by the Child Life Council.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
In general, to satisfy the test, the plaintiff must receive direct remuneration or indirect benefits that are substantial or significant and not incidentally related to advancing the purpose of the putative employer.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
We conclude that Ms. Sacchi's intern relationship with the Hospital fails to satisfy the threshold-remuneration test as a matter of law for two reasons.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
Although an internship was required for Ms. Sacchi to sit for a professional exam, she still had to pass the exam to receive her child life certification.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
For her to have obtained a position thereafter, she still had to find an open position, apply for that position, and then be selected over all other applicants in what Ms. Sacchi noted is a competitive field.
- 1 Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization not pleaded
We also decline the invitation to conclude that all interns are protected by Title VII, the ADA, and the ADEA.