Smith v. Cnty. of Santa Clara
| Decision Date | 01 August 2016 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 5:11-cv-05643-EJD |
| Parties | GINA SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
Plaintiffs Gina Smith, Laurey Shumaker, and Dagmar Chambers (collectively, "Plaintiffs"),1 bring this action against the County of Santa Clara ("the County"), and three County employees, Alfonso Banuelos, M.D., Barbara Traw, and Anna Hughes (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), the California Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and other related violations.
Presently before the court is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ("Mot."). Dkt. No. 49. Having now carefully reviewed the parties' papers and arguments in conjunction with the record, the court has determined that Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on some, but not all, of Plaintiffs' claims. Thus, Defendants' Motion will be granted in part and denied in part for the reasons explained below.
Plaintiffs allege, and Defendants do not dispute, that they are employed as Registered Nurses ("RN") by the County of Santa Clara. First Am. Compl. ("FAC") ¶ 26, Dkt. No. 5. Plaintiffs work at the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center ("SCVMC") in the Division of Maternity, specializing in the field of Mother Infant Care at the Mother Infant Care Center ("MICC"). Id.
The MICC is a postpartum care unit of the SCVMC offering medical treatment to infants and mothers following childbirth. Nurses in the MICC attend to the unique needs of new mothers and babies, including helping the mother to use the bathroom and bathe, changing the mother's undergarments, performing and assisting with breastfeeding techniques, and cleaning the mother's genital area of blood and other bodily fluids - a technique known as perinatal care. Decl. of Charles A. Bonner ( ) at Ex. 1, 77:4-78:23, Dkt. No. 63.
RNs employed by the County, including Plaintiffs, are members of the Registered Nurses Professional Association ("RNPA"). Id. ¶ 4. Like other nurses at SCVMC, MICC nurses are categorized as "per diem," "extra help," or "coded" nurses. Decl. of Joanne Cox ("Cox Decl.") ¶ 5, Dkt. No. 52. "Per diem" and "extra help" nurses fill staffing shortages caused by vacations, leaves of absence, and patient fluctuations, and are generally considered at-will employees. Id. In contrast, "coded" nurses work a minimum set number of hours each pay period, depending on their code,2 and are entitled to the rights set forth in the RNPA's Agreement with the County. Id. ¶ 6, Ex. A.
Barbara Traw is the Nurse Manager of the MICC. Decl. of Karl Sandoval ("Sandoval Decl.") at Ex. A, 71:5-7, Dkt. No. 51; see FAC ¶ 60. In her capacity as Nurse Manager, Trawoversees the day-to-day operations of the MICC, assists in the hiring of new staff, handles patient and staff complaints, and participates in disciplinary proceedings. Id. at Ex. A, 71:7-21. Nurses in the MICC report to Assistant Nurse Managers, who in turn report directly to Traw. See id. at Ex. A, 105:3-6. During the time period relevant to this action, there were three Assistant Nurse Managers for the MICC: Krystal Kajoica during the day, Annabelle Ablan in the evening, and Editha Guiang at night. Id. at Ex. A, 95:9-12; Ex. F, 42:1-25; 50:19-51:1; Ex. G, 8:19-23. Each shift also had a designated "charge nurse" who was responsible for overseeing the "workflow" of the shift, including ensuring that nurses take breaks, assigning nurses to newly admitted patients, and setting the assignments for the incoming nurses on the next shift. Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 38:3-39:22.
Between 2009 and 2011, the MICC went through at least two rounds of "layoffs," resulting in the transfer of nurses to other positions outside of the MICC or the elimination of their position all together. See id. at Ex. B, 127:16-128:18. When Traw became the Nurse Manager of the MICC in 2010, the SCVMC did not employ any male nurses in the MICC, although there were male student nurses who would rotate through the unit. See id. at Ex. A, 78:24-79:3; Ex. F 146:4-147:7. According to Plaintiffs, male nursing students typically did not perform the more intimate aspects of care in the MICC, such as checking for vaginal bleeding or conducting breast examinations. Decl. of Gina Smith ("Smith Decl.) ¶ 7-8, Dkt. No 61; Decl. Dagmar Chambers ("Chambers Decl.") ¶¶ 9-10, Dkt. No. 60.
In February 2011, Traw and the Assistant Nurse Managers - Kajoica, Ablan, and Guiang - began interviewing applicants for three "extra help" nursing positions in the MICC. Id. at Ex. A, 82:2-83:24; 94:16-95:8. With Traw's agreement, the Assistant Nurse Managers extended offers of employment to three male candidates, all of whom were licensed to practice in California by the Board of Registered Nursing. Id. at Ex. F, 452:3-9; Req. for Judicial Notice ("RJN"), Dkt. No. 50,at Exs. B, C, D.3 One of the new male hires was Trent Mikami ("Mikami"), who had previously worked in the MICC as a "special clerk." See Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 148:12-149:4.
As discussed in greater detail below, Plaintiffs had concerns regarding the hiring of the male nurses in the MICC, and specifically regarding the hiring of Mikami. C. Bonner Decl. at Ex. 1, 99:7-104:17.
Smith is an African-American female who is, and at all times relevant to this action was, employed by the County as a registered nurse. Smith is a 0.5 "coded" employee and works the evening shift in the MICC from 3:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. See Sandoval Decl. at Ex. A, 70:5-7. Smith began working for the County in 1992, and has worked in the MICC since June 2006. Smith Decl. ¶ 2.
On February 25, 2011, Smith asked Dr. James Byrne, the chief of the Maternal Child Health Division, "what his thoughts were regarding the prospect of male nurses working in the MICC unit as direct caregivers for mothers and babies." Smith Decl. ¶ 10. According to Smith, several female patients had conveyed to her that they felt uncomfortable and potentially unsafe with male nurses performing their care. Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 195:15-196:2. Three days after the conversation, Dr. Byrne wrote an email to the hospital administration stating: Id. at Ex. K, 37:2-17; 60:15-23, Ex. 11.
On or about March 10, 2011, Traw issued Smith an "Unfavorable Report" based on her comments to Dr. Byrne opposing the hiring of male nurses. Id. at Ex. A, 157:18-158:2, Ex. 5. The Report stated that that Smith's conduct violated the County's policy against gender discrimination. Id. at Ex. A, 157:18-158:2; 359:13-19; 378:5-379:11. As part of the disciplinaryaction in response to this Report, Traw also required Smith to attend a Sexual Harassment and Discrimination training. Id. at Ex. A at 168:169-4.
On January 24, 2011, Smith sent an email to Traw and the Chief Nursing Officer, Trudy Johnson, claiming that she had been denied breaks on January 20, 2011 by Chau Luu, the charge nurse on duty. C. Bonner Decl. at Ex. 2, 396:24-399:12. Smith further informed Traw and Johnson that Luu had instructed the MICC nurses "to relieve each other," which she argues "would have resulted in each nurse doubling her patient count" and improper patient to nurse ratios. Smith Decl. ¶ 28(b), Ex. 6.
On April 4, 2011, Smith sent an email to Traw and Johnson accusing Ablan of racial favoritism. See Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 318:8-12. Specifically, Smith testified that Ablan gave "special assignments and treatment" to Filipino nurses who were her friends. Id. at Ex. F, 318:8-12; 324:22-325:2. About a week later, on April 11, 2011, Smith sent another email to Traw and Johnson complaining of favoritism and racism by Raquel Bautista, the charge nurse on duty the previous day. Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 342:2-19, Ex. 8. And on May 17, 2011, Smith spoke with Traw about a patient assignment she considered unsafe and claimed that the assignment was racially discriminatory. Smith Decl. ¶ 28(c). Specifically, Smith voiced her concern that she had been assigned to six patients, three of whom were classified as "acuity level 3," while other nurses had only "acuity level 2" patients. Sandoval Decl. at Ex. F, 354:21-355:14. Traw acknowledged that Smith's complaint regarding this assignment raised issues of patient care and safety. C. Bonner Decl. at Ex. 2, 400:6-401:12. Traw also stated she received a complaint from the charge nurse on duty that day alleging that Smith had been disruptive and unprofessional. Traw Decl. ¶ 4, Ex. B, Dkt. No. 53.
Thereafter, on June 8, 2011, Traw issued Smith an "Employee Written Counseling" for violating the County's "Code of Conduct" policy based on the May 17th incident. See C. BonnerDecl. at Ex. 2, 421:1-18; Smith Decl., Ex. 7, Dkt No. 61-7; Sandoval Decl. at Ex. A, Ex. 40; Traw Decl. ¶ 4, Ex. B. The Written Counseling alleged that Smith was disruptive, repeatedly interrupted the charge nurse, attempted to change patient assignments without supervisor authorization, refused to take breaks at the scheduled time, and failed to use proper communication with her colleagues. Smith Decl. Ex. 7; Traw Decl. Ex. B.
On July 21, 2011, Smith was reviewing the schedule with Chambers, and believed that Filipino nurses were "more frequently scheduled to relief, resource and charge nurses than nurses of other national origins." Smith Decl. ¶ 28(d). Smith raised this...
To continue reading
Request your trial