Warren v. Time Warner Cable Inc.
1:17-cv-04029
E.D.N.YSep 28, 2020Background
- Warren was hired by Time Warner Cable in Nov. 2014 as a Customer Care Representative and was evaluated on objective monthly metrics (CSAT, FCR, PSU, Dispatch Rate, Transfer Rate, IP).
- From 2015 into 2016 Warren received repeated coaching, documented warnings, a 2015 performance review rating of "Partially Meets Expectations," and was placed on a 60‑day Performance Action Plan (PAP) starting Feb. 16, 2016.
- On April 8, 2016 Warren’s grandmother died; she took bereavement leave (April 13–17), experienced acute stress at work, and then applied for and was approved for FMLA/short‑term disability leave from April 20–June 30, 2016. Her psychiatrist dated the disability onset as April 20, 2016 and diagnosed Bipolar II.
- Time Warner reviewed Warren’s March and April 2016 performance metrics and, after multiple supervisory approvals, a termination recommendation was processed while Warren remained on leave; she was notified of termination on July 1, 2016 upon return.
- Time Warner identified comparators: Anthony Schlechter (same supervisor, similar PAP, also terminated in May 2016; did not take FMLA) and Gina Dell (placed on PAP but completed it and received a Final Written Warning).
- Procedural posture: Warren sued for FMLA interference and retaliation, ADA failure to accommodate and discrimination, and related NYCHRL claims; the court denied Warren's summary judgment motion, granted defendant’s cross‑motion on federal claims, and dismissed state claims without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FMLA interference — denial of benefits/reinstatement | Warren says Time Warner deprived her of the full PAP period (claims she was entitled to 90 days) and thus denied FMLA protection/restoration. | Time Warner says Warren’s 60‑day PAP concluded before leave; she received all approved FMLA leave and termination was for pre‑leave performance. | Court: No interference — Warren received approved FMLA leave; PAP timing claims unsupported and termination tied to pre‑leave performance. |
| FMLA retaliation — termination after taking leave | Warren relies on temporal proximity, comparator treatment (Schlechter, Dell), and a supervisor’s comment casting doubt on her leave as evidence of retaliatory intent. | Time Warner contends legitimate non‑retaliatory business reason: persistent performance failures predating leave; comparators were treated similarly. | Court: Even assuming prima facie case, Time Warner offered a legitimate reason; Warren failed to show pretext. Summary judgment for defendant. |
| ADA — failure to accommodate / disability discrimination | Warren argues bereavement reaction and workplace breakdown put employer on notice and Time Warner failed to extend PAP or accommodate. | Time Warner says Warren’s disability onset (per psychiatrist) was April 20, 2016 — after PAP ended — and it lacked notice during PAP; no protected activity or request for accommodation during PAP. | Court: Warren not disabled for ADA purposes during PAP / no notice or protected activity shown. ADA claims dismissed. |
| State law (NYCHRL) claims and supplemental jurisdiction | Warren presses NYCHRL discrimination, failure to accommodate, retaliation, aiding and abetting. | Time Warner seeks dismissal on merits; court may decline supplemental jurisdiction if federal claims resolved. | Court: Declined supplemental jurisdiction and dismissed state claims without prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (standard for genuine issue of material fact)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (burden‑shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Texas Dep’t of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (employer burden to articulate nondiscriminatory reason)
- St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (meaning of employer's articulated reason at summary judgment)
- Potenza v. City of New York, 365 F.3d 165 (FMLA retaliation prima facie elements / McDonnell‑Douglas application)
- Gorzynski v. JetBlue Airways Corp., 596 F.3d 93 (caution in granting summary judgment in discrimination cases)
- Slattery v. Swiss Reinsurance Am. Corp., 248 F.3d 87 (temporal proximity and need for additional evidence when adverse actions predate protected activity)