Arnoldi v. Bd. of Trs., Nat'l Gallery of Art

Decision Date26 July 2021
Docket NumberCase No. 1:20-cv-00091 (TNM)
Citation557 F.Supp.3d 105
Parties Shelly ARNOLDI, Plaintiff, v. The BOARD OF TRUSTEES, NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Columbia

Keith Bernard Lively, Doyle, Barlow & Mazard PLLC, Washington, DC, Morris Eli Fischer, Morris E. Fischer, LLC, Silver Spring, MD, for Plaintiff.

Brian J. Field, Schaerr Jaffe LLP, Stephanie R. Johnson, United States Attorney's Office, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

TREVOR N. McFADDEN, U.S.D.J.

The National Gallery of Art suspended, then terminated, Shelly Arnoldi for insubordination and dishonesty. Arnoldi sued, claiming that the Gallery unlawfully discriminated against her based on her gender, retaliated against her for complaining about the discrimination, and subjected her to a hostile work environment. Before the Court is the Gallery's motion for summary judgment.

The Court determines that no reasonable jury could find in Arnoldi's favor. The Gallery has proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory, and nonretaliatory reasons to support its decisions, and Arnoldi has not proffered evidence undermining them. The record also lacks evidence from which a jury could find a hostile work environment. The Court will therefore grant the Gallery's motion.

I.

Arnoldi began working for the Gallery in 2016 as Deputy Chief of Facilities Management ("AFM"), Engineering. Defs.’ Statement of Material Facts ("DSMF") ¶ 1, ECF No. 13-2; Pl.’s Resp. to Defs.’ Statement of Material Facts ("Pl.’s Resp. to DSMF") ¶ 1, ECF No. 15-10.1 In that position, she reported to Dave Samec, the AFM Chief. DSMF ¶ 4. Samec then reported to the Gallery's Administrator, Darrell Willson. Id. ¶ 5.

If "every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way," see Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina 12 (Penguin Books 2002) (1878), the AFM family was unhappy because of its lack of communication and teamwork. See Defs.’ Ex. I ("Dec. 2016 Memo") at 2, ECF No. 13-12; see also DSMF ¶ 9 (citing Defs.’ Ex. H ("Sept. 2017 Memo") at 2, ECF No. 13-11).2 In December 2016, Samec circulated a memo to the AFM Deputies and Assistant Deputies setting forth new protocols to remedy the situation. DSMF ¶ 11. Among other things, the memo addressed: improving meeting etiquette, curbing the spread of rumors, requiring at least one decisionmaking person from each department (such as a deputy chief) work onsite at the Gallery during workdays, and terminating alternative work schedules ("AWSs") beginning in January 2017. Id. ¶ 12; Dec. 2016 Memo at 3.

Samec also hired executive coaches/consultants to help AFM improve. DSMF ¶ 13. AFM Deputies, including Arnoldi, participated in individual and group coaching sessions each month. Id. ¶¶ 14–16, 18. During one group coaching session, "other deputies and assistants" became "very upset" when Arnoldi said that she believed she was senior to them and second in command to Samec. Defs.’ Ex. J ("Arnoldi Dep.") at 17–18, ECF No. 13-13; DSMF ¶ 17. In the individual sessions, Arnoldi's coach raised communication, mindfulness, and professionalism issues—much like feedback Arnoldi "had received many times in previous jobs." DSMF ¶¶ 19–20. Arnoldi testified that she had been told to "work on [her] soft skills" often and that, in other jobs, individuals had reacted strongly to her comments. Arnoldi Dep. at 22. She also stated that she did not believe she was doing anything wrong and that she was not going to change. See DSMF ¶ 21. The consultants ultimately informed Willson that Arnoldi was likely incapable of resolving her interpersonal challenges. See id. ; Defs.’ Ex. K at 3, ECF No. 13-14.

Even with the benefit of executive coaches, things were slow to improve in AFM. Samec circulated another memo in September 2017, explaining that after months of working with the team and the coaches, "it is evident that several of you are not improving or not improving fast enough in both individual and team communications." DSMF ¶ 22 (quoting Sept. 2017 Memo at 2). So he instituted new changes, including canceling AWSs and regular telework for AFM Deputies because "the nature of [the] positions" and "the need to improve ... project planning, coordination and communication" required that they "be at work regularly Monday to Friday." Sept. 2017 Memo at 3. The memo explained that ad hoc telework would be "considered on a case-by-case basis and shall be used as a rare exception versus a norm" and that a Deputy's request to ad hoc telework "must be pre-approved by the Chief in advance of the telework period." Id. The memo also stated that each department "shall have either their Deputy or Assistant Deputy present for duty at work during the core business hours of 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday to Friday." Id.

Arnoldi and Samec repeatedly clashed over telework. In October 2017, Samec emailed Arnoldi to inquire where she was when did not report to work. Defs.’ Ex. M ("Telework Docs.") at 2, ECF No. 13-16; DSMF ¶ 28. When Arnoldi responded that she was "[w]orking from home," Samec reminded her that he had "cancelled all AWS and Telework for Deputies and Assistants." Telework Docs. at 2. Arnoldi then said that she would put in a leave slip for that day. Id.

A couple of months later, in December 2017, Arnoldi emailed Samec on a Friday morning letting him know that she was "going to telework today." Id. at 3; DSMF ¶ 31. Samec responded that Arnoldi's request was "[a]pproved for today," but he asked Arnoldi to "[p]lease coordinate any requests for telework" with him further in advance. Telework Docs. at 3. He also told Arnoldi that the Engineering Department was "a ghost town today," adding that "[t]he Gallery expects us to be on site M-F during core business hours" and that it was "more convenient" for AFM personnel to be on site "to respond to occasional emergencies." Id.

Samec also raised telework during an April 2018 meeting with Arnoldi. He warned (among other things) that Arnoldi should not "abuse telework." Id. at 4; DSMF ¶ 34. Samec's notes show that he shared that there was "a perception that [Arnoldi was] teleworking a lot" and that "[t]elework is not an AFM entitlement." Telework Docs. at 4.

Despite the back and forth between Arnoldi and Samec, the telework problems continued. In May 2018, Arnoldi requested to telework the next day. DSMF ¶ 35. Samec rejected the request, citing his September 2017 memo. Id. Then in August 2018, Arnoldi teleworked four times without approval. See id. ¶ 36.

More conflict arose in June 2018, when the Gallery hired Samantha Dennison as the new Deputy Chief of Facilities Management, Maintenance. See id. ¶ 37. Samec chose the hiring panel, and Arnoldi was not on it. See id. ¶¶ 38–40. Although Arnoldi acknowledged that it was Samec's decision whom to include on the panel, she believed she was more experienced than his picks. See id. ¶¶ 39–40; Arnoldi Dep. at 32–34. She voiced her objection to Samec. DSMF ¶ 38. Arnoldi then approached three other Gallery employees to complain about her non-selection to the panel. Id. ¶¶ 41–48. She also requested Dennison's application materials to gauge her experience. Id. ¶ 46.

Another point of contention surfaced between Arnoldi, Samec, and other employees in late summer 2018. It stemmed from the Gallery's "Bronze Gates Repair Project," involving the large doors at one of the Gallery's entrances. Defs.’ Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Summ. J. ("Defs.’ Mot.") at 14, ECF No. 13-1. The Gallery received a proposal from a company called "Metal Man," but the Gallery's contracting officer for the project determined that it was late and incomplete. DSMF ¶¶ 49–50. Arnoldi, on the other hand, advocated for Metal Man. Id. ¶ 53. After obtaining a copy of its proposal, she forwarded it to Dennison, who was not involved in the procurement action and had not executed the necessary non-disclosure or conflict-of-interest paperwork. Id. ¶ 52; Defs.’ Ex. N ("Susp. Prop.") at 6, ECF No. 13-17.

Samec and Rodney Cartwright, Chief of Procurement and Contracts, warned Arnoldi that she should not be involved with the procurement solicitation. DSMF ¶¶ 54–55; Susp. Prop. at 6. Undeterred, Arnoldi emailed Cartwright requesting that he include her on correspondence relating to the procurement. DSMF ¶ 56; Defs.’ Ex. S ("Bronze Gates Emails") at 11, ECF No. 13-22. Cartwright responded that he "continue[d] to be greatly concerned" because Arnoldi "reviewed and evaluated a proposal that [she] never should have received." Bronze Gates Emails at 10. Arnoldi even communicated with Metal Man about its proposal. DSMF ¶ 58.

Around the time of the Bronze Gates issue, Samec and Arnoldi tangled again. Samec directed Arnoldi to schedule a group meeting about Engineer Technician Bryan Allen's departure from the Gallery. DSMF ¶¶ 59–60. When Arnoldi failed to do so, Samec repeated his request three days later. Id. ¶ 61. Arnoldi responded by telling Samec that she had been working with Allen on his transition and that her plan was to instead hold individual meetings the next week. Id. ¶ 62; Defs.’ Ex. T ("Allen Meeting Emails") at 2–3, ECF No. 13-23.

Samec then scheduled the meeting himself and sent an email invitation to Arnoldi and others. DSMF ¶ 64; Allen Meeting Emails at 2. She declined. Defs.’ Ex. T at 2, ECF No. 13-24. In other emails, Arnoldi, copying her staff, told Samec that she did "not find it beneficial to meet with such a large group" because there were "several different projects and contracts and few of those on your invitation are involved in all of it." Allen Meeting Emails at 5. She stated that she was "not sure what [Samec's] motive" was, but "it does not appear to be in the best interest of myself or my staff to attend." Id. In a later email, she told Samec "[n]either I nor my staff will be attending" the meeting because "[y]ou have all the information you requested." Id. at 6. Samec later learned Arnoldi attended a goodbye lunch for Allen instead of the scheduled meeting. Susp. Prop. at 9.

By October 2018, Samec had had enough. H...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Wye Oak Tech., Inc. v. Republic of Iraq
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • August 17, 2021
  • Hartzler v. Mayorkas
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • October 27, 2022
    ... ... 2020) (quoting Shinabargar v. Bd. of Trs. of Univ. of ... D.C. , 164 F.Supp.3d 1, 16 (D.D.C. 2016)). As with ... stage. Arnoldi v. Bd. of Trustees, Nat'l Gallery of ... Art , 557 F.Supp.3d 105, ... ...
  • Deskins v. Vilsack
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • December 5, 2022
    ... ... Arnoldi v. Bd. of Trs., Nat'l Gallery of Art, ... 557 F.Supp.3d 105, 115 ... ...
  • Weng v. Perez
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • March 28, 2023
    ...which describe her shortcomings during her PIP; and rebuttals to Ms. Weng's proposed comparators.[3]This all is admissible evidence. See id. (holding testimony, supporting emails, and [employer] records” sufficient). Second, “[a] factfinder reviewing [the documentation around Ms. Weng's PIP......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT