Sheila Lang v. Dist. of Columbia
| Decision Date | 30 March 2023 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 20-1199 (TSC) |
| Parties | SHEILA LANG, Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Plaintiff Sheila Lang brings this action against the District of Columbia and Anna R. Krughoff. Plaintiff alleges that, based on events during her tenure as a teacher for the District of Columbia Public Schools (“DCPS”), Defendants violated her rights under the First Amendment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VI”), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), and the D.C. Human Rights Act (“DCHRA”). Third Am Compl., ECF No. 15 (“TAC”). Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiff's claims in their entirety. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 18 (“MTD”). For the reasons that follow, the court will GRANT in part and DENY in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.
At the motion to dismiss stage, the court assumes the following allegations to be true. Plaintiff is a Black, non-Latina, American woman who, while in her sixties, worked as a reading resource teacher from 2011 until 2018 at DCPS-operated Cleveland Elementary School (“Cleveland”). TAC ¶¶ 3(a), 4(a). In that capacity, she was subject to the collective bargaining agreement between DCPS and the Washington Teacher's Union (“Bargaining Agreement”). Section 7.11.1 of the Bargaining Agreement provides:
As appropriate protocol, and when possible, all differences of an interpersonal nature should be worked out between an informal conference between the Teacher and the Administrator. When interpersonal differences occur, the parties recognize that it is inappropriate to criticize each other in the presence of others.
See id. ¶ 4(d)(2).[1]Defendant Krughoff became Cleveland's principal in May 2017. Id. ¶ 5(a).
Plaintiff alleges that beginning in 2004, “much of the neighborhood surrounding Cleveland became racially gentrified by white families, many of whom enrolled their children at Cleveland.” Id. ¶ 14(a). She claims that starting in 2013, “white gentrifying parents” conspired with DCPS officials, including Krughoff, to target “middle-aged, black African-American professionals” at Cleveland with “(1) unjustifiably low performance or work evaluations; (2) defamation; (3) involuntary transfers; (4) administrative leave and disciplinary investigations as a form of reprimand, demotion, suspension, or harassment; (5) excessing . . . jobs into nonexistence; and (6) forced retirements.” Id. ¶ 15.
These targeted actions were allegedly taken repeatedly over the course of several years and against multiple Black women employees at Cleveland. In 2013, DCPS gave “an unjustifiably low performance evaluation” not only to Plaintiff, but also to her colleagues Rita Mickey and Delores Rushing. Id. ¶¶ 16(d), 21(i). Plaintiff alleges that Cleveland administrators intended those evaluations to cause the removal of the women “from the school on account of their race, color, national origin, or age.” Id. ¶¶ 16(d), 21(k), 21(n). She claims that during the 2015-16 school year, Cleveland, “with encouragement from white gentrifying parents, barred Ms. Lang from selling snacks inside the Cleveland school building” to raise money for field trips, forcing her to “[sell] snacks outdoors, sometimes in bitterly cold or otherwise unpleasant weather.” Id. ¶¶ 17(b)-(e). At the same time, Cleveland “allowed the white gentrifying parents to sell snacks inside the Cleveland school building, so that they could raise funds for extracurricular activities.” Id. ¶ 17(f). Meanwhile, another teacher, Jacqueline Nelson, was “railed against” with criticism of her field trips until she felt forced to retire. Id. ¶ 18. And in 2017, Cleveland administrators gave teacher Charisse Robinson an unjustifiably low rating, id. ¶ 19, and warned nurse Tina Samuels not to “object[] to the demands of Cleveland's white gentrifying parents,” id. ¶ 20.
Plaintiff also alleges that from 2013 through 2018, Cleveland maintained a “racially bigoted ‘dual language program.'” Id. ¶ 4(c). The program “segregated” students “by placing an overwhelming majority of the nonwhite, English-language students in English-only classes while placing nearly all of the white students in a . . . Spanish immersion program.” Id. The “gentrifying white students” in the program “benefitted from a relatively low student-teacher ratio, and from a student body with very few, if any, special education or emotionally troubled students.” Id. ¶ 22(c). The racial disparity persisted “despite the alleged use of a DCPS lottery for selecting students for the program.” Id. ¶ 22(e). “Because of the racist undergirding of the dual language program, many of Cleveland's black professionals opposed the program.” Id. ¶ 22(i). Plaintiff alleges that their opposition made them targets for Cleveland's white parents and administrators. Id. ¶ 22(j). DCPS actions in giving a “biased evaluation of Rita Mickey,” “false and defamatory criticism of [Rita] Samuels,” and denying Plaintiff permission to fundraise inside the school “obliged” all three employees “to support the dual language program or to keep quiet about its racist segregation of Cleveland's students.” Id. ¶¶ 22(k), (m), (o).
In June 2017, Plaintiff used the funds she raised from selling snacks to sponsor a field trip to Europe for interested Cleveland students. Id. ¶¶ 24(a)-(b). Eight students and one parent joined the trip, which was to depart from John F. Kennedy Airport in New York City. Id. ¶ 24(e). While Plaintiff was at the departure gate, however, the students and parent “slipped away from Ms. Lang and secretly shopped at a mall inside the airport.” Id. ¶ 24(f). Plaintiff boarded the plane and did not realize until the flight reached London that the rest of the group had missed the flight. Id. ¶¶ 24(g)-(h). DCPS would later investigate the incident, and in September 2017 found “no wrongdoing on her part with regard to the field trip.” Id. ¶ 24(j).
Plaintiff claims that in the aftermath of that incident, Krughoff “organized with several of Cleveland's white gentrifying parents so as to establish a campaign that complained falsely to DCPS that [Plaintiff] abandoned the Cleveland students at JFK Airport,” and “conspired to target Lang to be fired or at least to be removed from Cleveland on the basis of her race, color, national origin.” Id. ¶¶ 25(d)-(e). On November 8, 2017, Krughoff and DCPS involuntarily transferred Plaintiff from her assignment at Cleveland to Browne Education Campus (“Browne”) effective November 27 and placed her on administrative leave for the intervening weeks. Id. ¶¶ 26(a), (e)-(f).
Plaintiff alleges that at least two Black Cleveland employees protested her involuntary transfer and were punished for it: Robyn Knight and Rodney Carter “complained directly to Principal Krughoff and in front of each other that Krughoff lacked a valid basis for involuntarily transferring Lang to Browne,” and that the transfer was “illegal,” “punitive,” and “racially discriminatory.” Id. ¶¶ (g)-(h). In retaliation, Defendants allegedly “excessed”-eliminated- Carter's job position as Director of School Operations and Knight's position as Mathematics Assistant Principal. Id. ¶¶ 26(v)-(z). Knight was allowed to remain at Cleveland as General Assistant Principal, but Carter was effectively forced to retire. Id. ¶¶ 26(y)-(z).
While Plaintiff was on administrative leave, she was invited by Cleveland's ParentTeachers Association (“PTA”) “to speak as one of its dues paying members at its November [15, 2017] meeting” about her involuntary transfer and its impact on “the literacy instruction and the emotional wellbeing of black students.” Id. ¶¶ 26(i)-(j). The meeting was held at Cleveland after school hours, and Krughoff was in attendance. Id. ¶¶ 26(k)-(l). In her speech, Plaintiff “condemn[ed] Cleveland's illegal workplace harassment” and her “involuntary transfer to Browne on the basis of her race, color, national origin, and age, with this involuntary transfer harming the literacy instruction and the emotional wellbeing of many of Cleveland's black students.” Id. ¶ 26(m). Plaintiff also “declared more or less that ‘there are people going downtown [to DCPS] saying false things about [middle-aged black] teachers.'” Id. (alterations in original). Plaintiff then said that anyone in the audience behind those alleged wrongs should “Stand up and make yourselves known!” Id. ¶ 26(q). When no one stood, Plaintiff “continued with her speech by calling on those who opposed both Cleveland's hostile workplace and its harmful impact upon Cleveland's students to ‘Stand up!'” Id. ¶ 26(s).
Plaintiff alleges that following her speech at the PTA meeting, Krughoff filed “a complaint or an adverse action” against her, and DCPS placed her “on forced administrative leave for more than seven months” while it “investigated the speech.” Id. ¶¶ 31(a)-(b), 32(a). Plaintiff claims those actions were punishment for violating the Bargaining Agreement's Section 7.11.1. Id. ¶ 30(a). On June 15, 2018, while the investigation was ongoing, DCPS eliminated Plaintiff's former position at Cleveland. Id. ¶ 35(a). Under the Bargaining Agreement, Plaintiff had a limited time to seek another DCPS job, but she concluded that doing so would be futile and so decided to retire on June 30, 2018. Id. ¶¶ 35(h)-(l), 36. The next month, DCPS informed Plaintiff by letter that its investigation had “substantiated” allegations about her “insubordination and discourteous treatment.” Id. ¶ 34(a).[2]
In April 2019, Plaintiff filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) alleging retaliation, a hostile work environment, and discrimination...
To continue reading
Request your trial