Rivers v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

• Decision Date: 31 March 2016
• Docket Number: 11-CV-5065 (KAM) (MDG)
• Citation: 176 F.Supp.3d 229
• Parties: Jakwan Rivers and Debra Crenshaw, Plaintiffs, v. New York City Housing Authority; John Rhea, individual; Gloria Finkelman, individual; Carolyn Jasper, individual; Carl Walton, individual; Melethil Alexander, individual; Local 237 International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Gregory Floyd; and Remilda Ferguson, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

176 F.Supp.3d 229

Jakwan Rivers and Debra Crenshaw, Plaintiffs,

v.New York City Housing Authority; John Rhea, individual; Gloria Finkelman, individual; Carolyn Jasper, individual; Carl Walton, individual; Melethil Alexander, individual; Local 237 International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Gregory Floyd; and Remilda Ferguson, Defendants.

11-CV-5065 (KAM) (MDG)

United States District Court, E.D. New York.

Signed March 31, 2016

Alexander T. Coleman, Michael J. Borrelli, Borrelli & Associates, P.C., Carle Place, NY, Jonathan R. Friedman, Law Offices of Ira D. Wincott, PLLC., Mineola, NY, Mindy L. Kallus, Russell J. Platzek, Alexander T. Coleman, Borrelli & Associates PLLC, Great Neck, NY, for Plaintiffs.

Jane Elizabeth Lippman, Donna Murphy, Jeffrey Niederhoffer, Nicole M. Van Gendt, New York City Housing Authority Law Department, Law Department, Stephen B. Moldof, Cohen, Weiss and Simon, LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Matsumoto, United States District Judge:

Plaintiffs Jakwan Rivers and Debra Crenshaw (“plaintiffs”) initiated this action against the New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”), NYCHA employees John Rhea (“Rhea”), Gloria Finkelman (“Finkelman”), Carolyn Jasper (“Jasper”), Carl Walton (“Walton”), and Melethil Alexander (“Alexander”), (collectively, the “NYCHA defendants”), as well as the Local 237 International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “Union” or “Local 237”), Union President Gregory Floyd (“Floyd”), and Union official Remilda Ferguson (“Ferguson”) (collectively, the “Union defendants”) alleging that defendants conspired to and did in fact retaliate against them for exercising their First Amendment free speech and association rights. Defendants have separately moved for summary judgment on all claims. For the reasons provided herein, the Union defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in its entirety, and the NYCHA defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

BACKGROUND

I. Factual Background

The following facts are set forth from the admissible evidence of record and are viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiffs as the non-moving parties. The court will provide a general background of the events giving rise to this action. The fact-specific nature of the allegations, however, makes it more prudent to discuss certain factual details that are supported by admissible evidence throughout the court's analysis as particular details become relevant.

A. Rivers

Rivers' Initial Work at NYCHA

Rivers began working for NYCHA as a maintenance worker in April 1998. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 37; Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 1.) He became a member of the Union as soon as he began his employment at NYCHA. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 38) Rivers' principal job duties involved emergency construction work near Long Island City. (Id. at ¶ 37.) Rivers worked at NYCHA until January 2006. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 1.) Throughout that period, he had a perfect disciplinary record without any negative evaluations or feedback. (Id. at ¶ 22.) In January 2006, Rivers took a leave of absence from NYCHA to work at the Union as a “business agent.” (Id. at ¶ 1.) In that capacity, he handled Union member grievances, visited members' work locations to investigate grievances, and defended members in local disciplinary hearings. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 24.)

Rivers' Work at the Union

In March 2007, Floyd became the Union president. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 19.) Beginning in January 2008 Floyd and his subordinate Ferguson, the director of the Union's housing division, told all Union employees that the Union backed then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg for the 2009 New York City mayoral election. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 4.) Around June 2008, Rivers learned that Floyd had begun to implement a policy of permitting NYCHA management to terminate Union members without opposition to solidify his relationship with NYCHA management. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Rivers alleges that Floyd told him to let the terminations “take [their] course.” (Id. ) It is undisputed however, that the number of terminations of Local 237-represented NYCHA employees did not materially differ during 2007 and 2008 from the number of terminations of Local 237-represented NYCHA employees in other years. (Union 56.1 at ¶ 124.)

In part because of their dissatisfaction with Floyd's leadership and in part because of their support for William Thompson (Bloomberg's Democratic opponent in the 2009 mayoral race), Rivers and six colleagues began to organize an alternative Union slate, Members for Change, and announced in August 2008 that members of the group would run a slate of candidates against Floyd and his supporters in the upcoming October 2009 Union elections. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶¶ 7, 9.) Members for Change distributed campaign literature, some of which including Rivers' photograph indicating that he was running for vice president of the Union. (Id. at ¶ 8; Union 56.1 at ¶ 28.) Toward the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009, Rivers publicly announced Members for Change's opposition to Floyd and its endorsement of Thompson in Union meetings before hundreds of members. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶¶ 10-11.)

Rivers alleges that Floyd's adherents at the Union took notice of Rivers' political activities. In November 2008, Rivers alleges that one of his supervisors screamed and cursed at him while he was discussing a Union member's grievances on the telephone. (Id. at ¶ 57.) A few weeks later, Union Deputy Director James Giocastro (“Giocastro”) allegedly told Rivers that he should support Bloomberg for mayor because the Union could have him “placed anywhere” in the city, suggesting that the Union could assign him to an inconvenient or undesirable work location. (Id. at ¶ 13.) On January 27, 2009, Floyd terminated Rivers' position as a business agent. (Id. at ¶ 12.) Rivers alleges, thought the Union disputes, that Floyd expressly told Rivers that it was due to his support for Thompson for mayor. (Id. at ¶ 12; Union Resp. to Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 12.)

Rivers' Return to NYCHA

Rivers immediately returned to NYCHA in his former position as a maintenance worker. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 15.) On January 27, 2009, upon learning that Rivers was being reassigned to NYCHA, defendant Finkelman, NYCHA's deputy general manager for operations, placed Rivers in the Bronx, at a NYCHA facility called the St. Mary's Houses without speaking to anyone at Local 237. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 46-49, 56.) It is undisputed that an employee has no right to return to his prior location after a term with the Union. (Union 56.1 at ¶ 36.) Rivers claims that his placement created a travel hardship for him because he lived in Suffolk County on Long Island.¹ (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 20.) It is undisputed that Finkelman placed Rivers at St. Mary's Houses based on NYCHA availability and need. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 54.) Rivers asserts that on his first day at St. Mary's Houses, the assistant superintendent said to him that Finkelman had told St. Mary's staff that Rivers had opposed the wrong people and that his supervisors should therefore make his life miserable.² (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 21.) That same day, Rivers was issued what he claims was a baseless counseling memorandum³ for failing to find himself a work assignment. (Id. at ¶ 22.)

At St. Mary's Houses, instead of the construction work he had previously done, Rivers was assigned to a position where his duties generally involved repair work inside NYCHA housing units. (Id. at ¶ 15.) His work entailed electrical repair, plumbing, carpentry, appliance repair, and door and window repair. (Id. ) Rivers claims, though defendants dispute, that he received insufficient training to perform these tasks. (Id. )

Rivers' frustration at St. Mary's Houses led him to informally request transfers from Finkelman. In February 2011, soon after Rivers began requesting a transfer, NYCHA Deputy General Manager for Administration Natalie Rivers (no relation to Rivers) emailed Finkelman to tell her that Union President Floyd was “driving [her] crazy” by insisting that Rivers “is supposed to be at St. Mary's.” (Id. at ¶ 86.) Finkelman responded, telling Natalie Rivers that Rivers should remain in the Bronx. (Id. )

In March 2009, Rivers (through counsel) filed an administrative petition before the New York City Board of Collective Bargaining. (Union 56.1 at ¶ 51.) In the petition, Rivers complained, as relevant here, that the Union and NYCHA had colluded to place him in the Bronx in retaliation for his opposition to Floyd. (NYCHA 56.1 at ¶¶ 63-64; Union 56.1 at ¶ 51; ECF No. 92, Declaration of Jeffery Niederhoffer (“Niederhoffer Decl.”), Ex. 28.) In August 2009, NYCHA and Rivers signed a written stipulation of settlement in which Rivers released his claims in exchange for a placement at a NYCHA facility closer to his home. (Niederhoffer Decl., Ex. 30; Union 56.1 at ¶ 52.)

Rivers' Tenure at the South Jamaica Houses

In September 2009, pursuant to the stipulation of settlement, Rivers was transferred to the South Jamaica Houses development in Queens. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 26; NYCHA 56.1 at ¶ 65.) Rivers continued to protest, however, that he was not properly trained for his job responsibilities. Though it is undisputed that Rivers received many trainings, Rivers states that they were superficial and did not adequately prepare him for his daily responsibilities at NYCHA. (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 17; NYCHA 56.1 at ¶¶ 37, 58-59, 69-71, 75-78, 91.)

Shortly after his transfer to the South Jamaica Houses, Rivers alleges that Union Deputy Director Giocastro visited the development and told Rivers' supervisor Margo Madden (“Madden”) as well as the South Jamaica Houses superintendent that they “could do anything they want to Rivers, such as giving him any assignments and writing him up for any reason, and the Union would not represent Rivers or stop their abuse.” (Pl. 56.1 at ¶ 26.) Rivers alleges that Giocastro told Rivers that Giocastro would permit the mistreatment because Rivers was running against Floyd and supporting Thompson. (Id. at ¶ 27.) Rivers alleges that Madden and Rivers' other supervisors subsequently...