IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Similar documents
Case 1:15-cv KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2015 Page 1 of 9

Case 2:07-cv JFB-WDW Document 15-2 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 10 CIVIL ACTION INTRODUCTION

PLAINTIFF AVA SMITH- THOMPSON S COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT SARA LEE CORPORATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~,~,~,,.c~...,... ~~"~ ~ " FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLI~ SEP -9 ;i ~ [~: 0~ CBA~OTTE OIVlSlON

Case 4:10-cv CW Document 1 Filed 10/13/10 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 39 Filed: 02/17/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:163

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION NO. } 1 COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

2015 National Legal Research Teach-In Kit

Case 2:16-cv GMN-VCF Document 1 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 10

Case 5:12-cv LS Document 1 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 1:14-cv KAM-JO Document 8 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 36

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case: 1:06-cv JRA Doc #: 28 Filed: 05/08/09 1 of 9. PageID #: 220

Case 5:15-cv SAC-KGS Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, by and through her undersigned counsel, by way of JURISDICTION

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case5:11-cv EJD Document28 Filed09/09/11 Page1 of 10

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 05/15/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 1:14-cv CKK Document 1 Filed 08/22/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/30/19 Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Courthouse News Service

Case 1:15-cv RBJ-KLM Document 1 Filed 05/11/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 324 W. Market Street Greensboro, NC 27401

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

2. One of the defendant in the case is Parker & Gould (P&G). What is exactly P&G?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

Case 4:16-cv JEG-CFB Document 1 Filed 12/23/16 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Courthouse News Service

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Plaintiff, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND NATURE OF ACTION

Case 3:15-cv EDL Document 1 Filed 12/09/15 Page 1 of 16

Courthouse News Service

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. No.: Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 5 Filed 05/18/2006 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF OHIO EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

IN TI-[E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. ..-ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION n/k/a DISH, LTD.,

Case 3:10-cv P-BN Document 76 Filed 07/27/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 995

Case: 5:15-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/20/15 2 of 9. PageID #: 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT! WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN! SOUTHERN DIVISION!

Case 3:10-cv HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/09/19 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EEOC and Darmo et al. v. Pinnacle Nissan, Inc. et al.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY PASSAIC COUNTY, LAW DIVISION CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO.: COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:14-cv RM-MJW Document 1 Filed 05/27/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO

Case 4:15-cv RLY-DML Document 1 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHEASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C O M P L A I N T

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Plaintiffs, Case No.: VERIFIED COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

2:06-cv AC-DRG Doc # 13 Filed 02/02/09 Pg 1 of 15 Pg ID 53

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Case: 1:14-cv SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/08/14 Page: 1 of 10 PAGEID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Case 3:16-cv L Document 1 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Civil Division General Docket

Case 8:11-cv PJM Document 1 Filed 05/05/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CASS COUNTY, MISSOURI AT HARRISONVILLE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 5:09-cv JMH Document 1 Filed 10/26/2009 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Equal Employment Opportunity ) Commission, ) Case No.: CV PHX-DAE

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/29/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:09-cv CAP Document 1 Filed 12/21/2009 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

2:18-cv CSB-EIL # 1 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION COMPLAINT

Case 1:15-cv WJM-MJW Document 1 Filed 08/17/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

1/29/2019 8:49 AM 19CV04626

Case 0:12-cv RSR Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2012 Page 1 of 15

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv KMW Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/04/2013 Page 1 of 22

Case: 1:17-cv DCN Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/02/17 1 of 19. PageID #: 69

Case 7:15-cv Document 16 Filed in TXSD on 08/26/15 Page 1 of 15 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MCALLEN DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 1 Filed 03/27/2006 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE. NOW COMES Plaintiff, Stephen Torres, and files this, his Original Petition

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

INDIVIDUAL, COLLECTIVE, AND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO : : : : : : : : : : :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

Transcription:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Case No. 98-N-1298 DONALD D. REED, v. Plaintiff, RODNEY SLATER, Secretary of the Department of Transportation, on behalf of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Donald D. Reed, through his counsel, Isaacson, Rosenbaum, Woods & Levy, P.C., on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Colorado, for his Complaint alleges: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiff Donald D. Reed is a former long term employee of the Department of Transportation' s ("DOT") Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") and a devout Sabbath keeper, who was illegally terminated from his employment when Defendant forced him to choose between the free exercise of his religion and his job. Defendant treated Mr. Reed less favorably than similarly situated non-sabbath keepers and refused to accommodate Mr. Reed' s religious requirements. In addition, Defendant retaliated against Mr. Reed for challenging his termination.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to Article III, 2 of the U.S. Constitution and 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1343, and 1346(b). Mr. Reed is alleging violation of his rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000(e) et seq. ("Title VII"), as amended by 717 of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, 42 U.S.C. 2000(e)-16, and violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA"), 42 U.S.C. 2000(b)(b), et seq. 3. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), because the unlawful employment practices alleged herein were committed within the State of Colorado. 4. Mr. Reed has complied with the administrative prerequisites of his claims. III. PARTIES 5. Donald D. Reed is a resident of the State of Colorado. 6. Rodney Slater is the Secretary of the DOT, an agency of the federal government, which operates the FAA. IV. ALLEGATIONS 7. Donald Reed was employed with the FAA from 1986 until his illegal termination in July of 1995. During his career, Mr. Reed worked in various capacities, including in positions as an air traffic controller ("controller") and a Quality Assurance and Training Specialist ("QATS"). During the entire course of his employment with the FAA, Mr. Reed' s performance was evaluated from fully successful to exceptional. 8. In March of 1990, Mr. Reed was transferred to the Pueblo air traffic control tower under the auspices of the DOT and the FAA. Until August of 1991, Mr. Reed worked as an air traffic control development employee. 9. From November of 1991 until September of 1994, Mr. Reed worked as a Quality Assurance and Training Specialist ("QATS"). QATS is a staff position not covered by the National Air Traffic Controller Association ("NATCA") collective bargaining agreement, which among other things, governs selection of days off by bargaining unit employees. 2

10. Since March of 1990, Mr. Reed' s sincerely held religious beliefs have required observance of the seventh-day Sabbath, from sundown on Friday until sundown on Saturday. 11. As a QATS, Mr. Reed worked from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. He was not required to work Friday after sundown or on Saturday. 12. In December of 1993, George Hof became the new facility manager. At that time, Mr. Reed told Mr. Hof about his religious obligations to observe the Sabbath. 13. In August of 1994, Hof removed Reed from his QATS position and reassigned him to a position as a controller. Controllers are required to work in rotating shifts on a seven day per week schedule. 14. Upon learning that he would be returned to the controller work force, on August 15, 1994, Mr. Reed requested accommodation of his Sabbath. 15. From that date, until the date of his termination, Mr. Reed repeatedly requested various accommodations for his religion, including use of overtime and compensatory time, flexible scheduling, priority to bid for regular days off, a staff position with Friday and Saturday off, maintaining adequate staffing, rescinding prime time leave requests, a transfer to a larger facility, turning operations over to a centralized radar known as the "Denver Center," and shift coverage by supervisors. 16. Defendant refused to implement any of the suggested accommodations to Mr. Reed's religious beliefs. 17. During the period in which Mr. Reed was requesting accommodation, Mr. Hof and other supervisors at the Pueblo facility treated Mr. Reed less favorably and with hostility, because of his religion. 18. As a result of the Agency' s failure to maintain adequate staffing in 1994 and 1995, the Agency and the local NATCA union agreed to a minimum staffing level of nine controllers at the Pueblo facility. The agreement provided that once a staffing level of nine controllers was reached, the release of any controller had to be approved by the union. 3

19. In March 1995, Mr. Hof requested that a controller be allowed to transfer to another facility, which would take the staffing level below the minimum. The Union agreed, but only on the express condition that staff and supervisors would provide coverage so that controllers including Reed would be able to take leave when requested. Hof personally agreed to provide coverage for controllers in order to facilitate the grant of controllers' leave requests. 20. Thereafter, non-sabbath keepers' leave requests were granted because supervisor and staff covered their shifts. However, staff and supervisors, including Hof, refused to provide coverage for Mr. Reed' s leave requests for the primary reason that Reed' s leave was requested in order to allow him to observe the Sabbath. 21. On five Saturdays in the Summer of 1995, Mr. Reed' s leave requests were denied and he was scheduled to work on his Sabbath. Mr. Reed refused to compromise his religious obligations and work on his Sabbath. 22. On July 28, 1995, Mr. Reed's employment was terminated for his absences. 23. Mr. Reed challenged his removal before the Merit Systems Protection Board, asserting that he had suffered religious discrimination. 24. On or about March 16, 1996, Administrative Judge James Kasic reversed the Agency' s decision to terminate Mr. Reed and ordered the Agency to reinstate him. Mr. Reed was reinstated to his former position in April 1996. 25. The Agency filed a petition for review, and, on August 18, 1997, the MSPB reversed the initial decision and remanded the case to Judge Kasic for further findings. Mr. Reed continued to remain employed at the Agency pending the decision on remand. 26. During the two-year period of Mr. Reed' s reinstatement, Mr. Reed' s performance was satisfactory and his religious beliefs were fully and easily accommodated without undue hardship to the Agency. 27. On April 10, 1998, Judge Kasic issued a decision affirming the Agency' s original decision to terminate Mr. Reed. 4

28. On April 24, 1998, Mr. Reed was placed on administrative leave, and on May 9, 1998, Mr. Reed's employment was terminated for the stated reason that the remand had been decided in the Agency's favor. 29. There was no legitimate non-retaliatory reason for the Agency' s decision to terminate Mr. Reed in April 1998. 5

V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000(e) et seq.) 30. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1-29 of this Amended Complaint as though fully alleged herein. controller. terminated. 31. Intentional Religious Discrimination: a. Mr. Reed is a member of a protected class by virtue of his religious beliefs. b. Mr. Reed was qualified to perform the duties of his position as an air traffic c. An adverse employment action was taken against Mr. Reed when he was d. Mr. Reed was terminated because he was treated less favorably by virtue of his Sabbath obligations than were non-sabbath keepers with respect to accommodation of leave requests. 32. Failure to Reasonably Accommodate Religious Obligations: employment requirements. employment requirements. undue hardship. a. Mr. Reed' s bona fide religious beliefs conflicted with the FAA' s b. Mr. Reed informed Defendant of his religious beliefs. c. Mr. Reed was terminated for failure to comply with Defendant's d. Defendant could have accommodated Mr. Reed' s religious beliefs without 33. As a result of Defendant' s illegal conduct, Mr. Reed has been damaged economically and emotionally. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of RFRA, 42 U.S.C. 2000(b)(b), et seq.) 6

34. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1-32 of this Amended Complaint as though fully alleged herein. 35. Defendant substantially burdened the exercise of Mr. Reed' s religion. 36. Defendant's refusal to grant Mr. Reed leave to observe the Sabbath did not further a compelling governmental interest. 37. Terminating Mr. Reed' s employment and denying him reasonable accommodation was not the least restrictive means of furthering any compelling governmental interest. 38. As a result of Defendant' s illegal conduct, Mr. Reed has been damaged economically and emotionally. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000(e) et. seq. -- Retaliation) 39. Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1-37 of this Amended Complaint as though fully alleged herein. 40. Mr. Reed objected to the Agency' s discrimination against him on the basis of his religion and the Agency's failure to accommodate his religion and challenged the Agency's discriminatory and illegal practices. 41. The Agency terminated Mr. Reed' s employment on May 9, 1998 in retaliation for Mr. Reed's challenging its discriminatory practices. 42. As a result of Defendant's illegal conduct, Mr. Reed has been damaged economically and emotionally. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Reed respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor and against Defendant, and award him: a. back pay and reinstatement, or alternatively, front pay; b. compensatory damages, including those for emotional suffering; c. attorney fees and costs; d. injunctive and declaratory relief; 7

e. all equitable relief; f. pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest lawful rate; and g. such further relief as justice requires. PLAINTIFF HEREBY DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE. 8