473 F.Supp.3d 309
S.D.N.Y.2020Background
- Plaintiff Dawashia Farmer, an African American woman, worked as a Shake Shack "team member" at the Upper East Side restaurant from November 2018 until her termination on January 5, 2019.
- Farmer informed manager Damon Cordova and others of her pregnancy in late November 2018; thereafter managers questioned her ability to work, requested documentation, and suggested short-term disability.
- Farmer requested accommodations (moved from back to front due to overheating) and complained to a manager (Leon) that she was being treated differently because of pregnancy; she provided pregnancy documentation on January 4, 2019.
- Cordova challenged the documentation, criticized her performance, and fired Farmer on January 5, 2019; other employees (several African American) were later disciplined/terminated.
- Farmer sued under Title VII, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL for sex/pregnancy discrimination, race discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment, and aiding and abetting; defendants moved to dismiss.
- The district court (Engelmayer, J.) denied dismissal of sex (pregnancy) discrimination and retaliation claims and related aiding-and-abetting claims against Cordova, but dismissed race-discrimination and hostile-work-environment claims and other claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employment / joint-employer status | Farmer contends she was an employee of Shake Shack Enterprises and joint-employed with Shake Shack UES (paid hourly, regular schedule, hired/fired by manager employed by defendants). | Defendants argued Farmer was not plausibly an employee of either entity. | Pled facts (hours, pay, hiring/firing, common management) suffice to plausibly plead employment and joint-employer status. |
| Sex / pregnancy discrimination (Title VII & NYSHRL & NYCHRL) | Farmer argues termination was motivated at least in part by pregnancy; temporal proximity and supervisors’ pregnancy-related comments show discriminatory intent. | Defendants contended the complaint fails to plead qualification and causal connection. | Complaint plausibly alleges pregnancy discrimination; sex discrimination claims survived. |
| Race discrimination (Title VII, NYSHRL, NYCHRL) | Farmer asserts she was fired because she is African American and cites other adverse actions against African American co-workers. | Defendants argued pleadings lack nonconclusory facts tying termination to race and same-actor (hired and fired by Cordova) undermines inference of racial animus. | Race-discrimination claims dismissed for failure to plead a plausible link between firing and racial animus (NYCHRL claim likewise dismissed). |
| Retaliation (Title VII, NYSHRL, NYCHRL) | Farmer says her accommodation requests and complaints about pregnancy-based treatment were protected activity; adverse action followed closely in time. | Defendants argued she did not engage in protected activity, employer lacked knowledge, and no causal connection. | Complaint plausibly pleads protected activity, employer knowledge, and short temporal proximity — retaliation claims survived. |
| Hostile work environment (Title VII & NYSHRL) | Farmer alleges repeated pregnancy-related questioning, demands for documentation, and differential treatment produced an abusive workplace. | Defendants argued incidents were isolated/insufficiently severe or pervasive. | Court dismissed hostile-work-environment claims as the alleged conduct was not severe or pervasive enough. |
| Aiding & abetting (NYSHRL & NYCHRL) | Farmer seeks individual liability against Cordova for aiding/abetting employer’s unlawful sex-discrimination and retaliation. | Defendants argued individual aiding/abetting claims are unsupported or circular. | Court allowed aiding-and-abetting claims against Cordova to proceed as to the surviving sex-discrimination and retaliation claims; no predicate for aiding/abetting on dismissed claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (legal conclusions not entitled to pleading deference)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (burden-shifting framework for employment discrimination)
- Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989) (factors for determining employee status)
- Lenzi v. Systemax, Inc., 944 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2019) (PDA/pregnancy discrimination principles)
- Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2015) (pleading standards for discrimination claims)
- Vega v. Hempstead Union Free Sch. Dist., 801 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 2015) (Title VII causation and pleading)
- Nassar (Univ. of Tex. Southwestern Med. Ctr. v. Nassar), 570 U.S. 338 (2013) (but-for causation in retaliation claims)
- Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (employer vicarious liability for supervisor discrimination)
- Shultz v. Congregation Shearith Israel, 867 F.3d 298 (2d Cir. 2017) (hostile-work-environment dismissal precedent)
- Arculeo v. On-Site Sales & Mktg., LLC, 425 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2005) (joint-employer doctrine)
- Tomka v. Seiler Corp., 66 F.3d 1295 (2d Cir. 1995) (individual liability / aiding and abetting under NY law)
- Zann Kwan v. Andalex Grp. LLC, 737 F.3d 834 (2d Cir. 2013) (retaliation pleading and employer knowledge)