Montgomery v. Omnisec International Security Services, Inc.
961 F. Supp. 2d 178
D.D.C.2013Background
- Plaintiff Phyllis Montgomery, proceeding pro se, sues Omnisec alleging age, race, gender discrimination and retaliation related to union activity.
- Montgomery, an African-American woman over 50, was terminated as a Special Police Officer and union Shop Steward on Oct. 19, 2010.
- She filed an EEOC charge on Apr. 22, 2011 asserting discrimination based on age (51) but not race or sex.
- Defendant removed the case to this court on Mar. 28, 2013, and moved to dismiss the complaint.
- The court granted in part and denied in part, including dismissing race and gender claims for failure to exhaust, and dismissing the hybrid CBA claim for timeliness.
- The remaining issue is whether an age discrimination claim survives a Rule 12(b)(6) challenge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Montgomery exhaust race and gender claims? | Montgomery asserts cover letter indicated race and gender. | EEOC charge only checked age; no facts alleging race/gender discrimination. | Race and gender claims are dismissed for lack of exhaustion. |
| Is the age discrimination claim plausibly pleaded? | Plaintiff alleges termination and evidence of animus; similarly situated comparators exist. | Plaintiff failed to show a prima facie case or pretext with sufficient detail at this stage. | Age discrimination claim survives; adequately pleaded at the motion-to-dismiss stage. |
| Is the hybrid CBA claim time-barred? | Alleges retaliation for Shop Steward duties; seeks arbitration; union breach claim. | Six-month statute of limitations applies to hybrid claims; last action was Jan. 4, 2011; suit filed Feb. 27, 2013. | Hybrid wage claims time-barred; dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Park v. Howard Univ., 71 F.3d 904 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (administrative charge exhaustion governs subsequent Title VII actions)
- Caldwell v. ServiceMaster Corp., 966 F. Supp. 33 (D.D.C. 1990s) (liberal construction of EEOC charges but requires some specificity)
- Washington v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 160 F.3d 750 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (ADEA exhaustion same as Title VII)
- Hunt v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Corr., 41 F. Supp. 2d 31 (D.D.C. 1999) (failure to check gender can bar gender discrimination claim)
- Riggsbee v. Diversity Servs., Inc., 637 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D.D.C. 2009) (EEOC narrative must reflect alleged discrimination bases)
- DelCostello v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (U.S. 1983) (hybrid section 301 claims and six-month limitations period)