Stoutenger v. City of Fulton

• Decision Date: 02 June 2022
• Docket Number: 5:21-cv-00563
• Parties: JOLENE STOUTENGER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FULTON; FULTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY; BRADLEY BROADWELL; JOSEPH FIUMARA; and, DEANA MICHAELS, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York

JOLENE STOUTENGER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FULTON; FULTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY; BRADLEY BROADWELL; JOSEPH FIUMARA; and, DEANA MICHAELS, Defendants.

No. 5:21-cv-00563

United States District Court, N.D. New York

June 2, 2022

DECISION AND ORDER

THOMAS J. McAVOY, Senior United States District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Jolene Stoutenger commenced this action asserting claims pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y Exec. Law § 290 et seq. (“NYSHRL”). See First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) Dkt. 4. Plaintiff's claims involve allegations of disparate treatment on the basis of gender and familial status, and retaliation. See generally, id. Plaintiff seeks injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, and costs. Id. Defendants City of Fulton, Fulton Community Development Agency, Bradley Broadwell, Joseph Fiumara, and Deanna Michaels (collectively “Defendants”) move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss the FAC in its entirety. Dkt. 17. Plaintiff opposes the motion, Dkt. 23, and Defendants reply. Dkt. 26. The Court will decide the motion on the parties' submissions and without oral argument.

II. BACKGROUND^[1]

Stoutenger is the mother and primary caregiver of several school-aged children. FAC, ¶¶ 7, 27. Plaintiff has worked as a Certified Housing Specialist at Fulton Community Development Agency (“FCDA”) since July 1, 2019. Id., ¶¶ 8, 28. FCDA is a municipal corporation that administers federal and state grants for community development and public improvement projects for the City of Fulton (“Fulton”), including housing-related grants and subsidies from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). Id., ¶ 10. Bradley Broadwell (“Broadwell”) is the current Executive Director of FCDA and began in that position in December 2020. Id., ¶ 11. Joseph Fiumara (“Fiumara”) served as the Executive Director of FCDA until July 2020. Id., ¶ 13. Fulton is a municipality in Oswego County, New York. Id., ¶ 9. Deanna Michaels is the Mayor of the City of Fulton (“Mayor Michaels”), and in that capacity also serves as the Chairperson of FCDA's Board of Directors, which is comprised of Mayor Michaels and the City of Fulton's Common Council members. Id., ¶ 15. As the Chairperson of FCDA's Board of Directors, Mayor Michaels provides direct management oversight over FCDA staff, particularly after Fiumara was removed from his position at FCDA. Id., ¶ 16.

Plaintiff was invited to interview for the Certified Housing Specialist position by the out-going Housing Specialist she replaced, Karen O'Brien (“O'Brien”), a former work colleague. Id., ¶ 29. When she interviewed for the position at FCDA, Stoutenger met with Fiumara. See id., ¶ 31. After Fiumara told Plaintiff that the Certified Housing Specialist position offered only $17.50 per hour, Stoutenger asked if the wage rate was negotiable. Id., ¶ 32. Fiumara told Plaintiff that FCDA could not offer her a higher wage, but that she was eligible to earn more working overtime, and would be eligible for health care insurance for her and her children. Id., ¶¶33, 35. Fiumara also stated that the Housing Services Supervisor, Peggy Birkhead, would be retiring soon and he would consider Plaintiff for that position. Id., ¶34.

Stoutenger alleges that at all relevant times, Defendants have been aware that she is the primary caregiver to her children. Id., ¶ 39. She alleges that in addition to trying to obtain health care insurance for her children through FCDA, Stoutenger has identified herself as the primary caregiver to her children by taking time off from work to tend to their health care needs, and unexpected gaps in child care during the COVID pandemic. See id., ¶¶ 61, 131, 153-155.

Allegations Regarding Defendants' Discriminatory Differential Treatment

Stoutenger alleges that she has been subjected to discriminatory differential treatment because of her gender and status as a working mother throughout her tenure at FCDA. In this regard, Plaintiff alleges that she has been subjected to:

• Denial of the Same Wage Rate Paid to Former Housing Specialist Who Had No Child Care Responsibilities: Stoutenger alleges that O'Brien, who she replaced, but who did not have child care responsibilities, was paid $40, 000 per year, whereas FCDA hired Plaintiff at a pay rate of $17.50 (and which was increased by 85 cents per hour in 2020), which is approximately $31, 000 per year, or $9000 less than what O'Brien received for the same job. See FAC, ¶¶ 31, 70-72, 99.

• Denied Consideration for Promotion to Supervisor in 2019: Stoutenger alleges that FCDA and Fiumara denied her the opportunity to be considered for the promotion to Housing Services Supervisor. See FAC, ¶¶ 44-51. Instead, the FCDA Housing Services Supervisor position was offered to Pete Williams (“Williams”), “a man who has no children, and twenty-years (20) experience working as a manager in an unrelated industry.” Id., ¶¶ 55-56.

• Denied Promised Overtime: Stoutenger alleges throughout her tenure at FCDA, she has been denied the promised opportunity to earn overtime pay, contending instead that after she started working at FCDA “Fiumara made it clear that overtime pay was only available on the rare occasion and had to be pre-approved.” FAC, ¶¶ 58-59.

• Denied Promised Health Care Insurance for Plaintiff and Her Children: Stoutenger alleges that FCDA has denied her promised health care insurance for her and her children. Plaintiff alleges that after she was hired, Fiumara actively dissuaded her from seeking FCDA's fully-paid health care insurance for her children. See FAC ¶ 61. Thereafter, FCDA reduced the health care insurance benefit from fully-paid health insurance to a $5000 health care stipend. See id., ¶¶ 62-75. Plaintiff alleges that “[s]ince Mayor Michaels and the FCDA Board of Directors hired Defendant Broadwell, Plaintiff's pay and benefits have continued to be whittled down. In or about January 2021, Plaintiff was informed that FCDA would no longer be providing] the $5000 stipend to be used toward heath care costs. Instead, FCDA now offers a health care insurance plan that is too expensive for Plaintiff to afford.” Id., ¶¶120-122.

• Denied Opportunities for Training and Advancement: In April 2021, FCDA staff learned of a new federal voucher and grant program for homeless individuals called the Emergency Housing Voucher (“EHV”) program. See FAC ¶139. When Stoutenger expressed interest in attending webinars and other training so that she could assist FCDA in obtaining the vouchers and additional federal funding, “FCDA's new assistant director, Sarah Farley (‘Farley') actively dissuaded Plaintiff from working to secure the EHV vouchers and programmatic grant from HUD because Farley said [Pete] Williams [the Housing Services Supervisor] should have the opportunity to do this work even though Williams has done nothing to date to secure the EHV vouchers and exhibited no intent to do so.” Id., ¶¶ 140-141. In addition, following some staff turnover at FCDA Stoutenger “expressed to FCDA management her willingness to take on additional duties and advance her career at the agency. However, FCDA management has suggested that Stoutenger's ability to obtain a management position at the agency is unlikely because of her alleged inability to get along with Williams, even though she has complained to Defendant Broadwell and Farley several times about Williams because of his failure to do his job and his expectation that Plaintiff will do his work, which is a situation that remains unremedied.” Id., ¶¶ 150-151.

Comments and Other Alleged Mistreatment

Plaintiff alleges that she has been subjected to comments and other mistreatment that, she contends, demonstrate bias on the basis of her gender and status as a working mother. In this regard, Stoutenger alleges that Fiumara routinely referred to her as “girl” or “good girl, ” and never took her knowledge of government benefit programs and her professional experience seriously, which he demonstrated by micro-managing every aspect of Plaintiff's work. See FAC ¶¶84-94.

Plaintiff also alleges that FCDA's managerial staff, including current Executive Director Broadwell, have admonished Stoutenger in writing for alleged “performance deficiencies, ” which, she contends, have nothing to do with work performance, but instead Plaintiff's need to use leave when her children require medical attention or when she does not have adequate child care. As an example, Plaintiff alleges that in June 2021, Broadwell issued her a disciplinary write-up in which he chastised her for alleged “performance issues that affect FCDA and its staff” but the memorandum focused on Plaintiff using her own paid time off (“PTO”) on short-notice to tend to her sons' medical care needs and child care during a week in which her children were no longer in school but not yet in camp, and her child care for one day fell through. FAC, ¶¶ 153-154.

Protected Activity and Defendants' Responses

Stoutenger alleges she has repeatedly protested Defendants' discriminatory differential treatment by complaining to her FCDA supervisors and Mayor Michaels, all of whom she contends have subjected her to illegal retaliation. Plaintiff contends that “[a] few weeks after Stoutenger complained about FCDA's failure to afford her the promised promotion to Housing Services Supervisor and her low wage rate, FCDA and Fiumara began to retaliate against her. ” FAC, ¶ 62. This included reducing the employer-funded health care benefit as discussed above, and FCDA management notifying the staff that the four (4) paid personal days they had been previously afforded would...