Thomas v. Five Star Elec.
| Decision Date | 05 May 2022 |
| Docket Number | 18-CV-3691 (AT) (RWL) |
| Parties | CAZE D. THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. FIVE STAR ELECTRIC, DEPARTMENT OF EEOC, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, and METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
AMENDED [1] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HON. ANALISA TORRES: MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff Caze D. Thomas (“Thomas”), proceeding pro se, brings this action against Defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) and Five Star Electric Corp. (“Five Star”). Thomas alleges inter alia, that both Defendants have violated the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 et seq. (“Title VII”), and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Both Defendants have moved to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and Five Star additionally moves for dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). For the reasons that follow, I recommend that both motions be granted and that the action be dismissed with prejudice.
Factual Background[2]
Plaintiff Thomas is a person of gender transition experience who identifies as male.[3] (Complaint at p. 111, 131.) The MTA is a New York State public benefit corporation. N.Y. Pub. Auth Law § 1263. Five Star is the largest union electrical contractor in the City of New York; all electricians are members of Local Union #3, IBEW (the “Union”). (See Affidavit of Ernest R. Stolzer in Support of Five Star's Motion to Dismiss dated October 1, 2018 (Dkt 27) (“Stolzer Aff.”), Ex. 2 at 4.). Jeff Thurston (“Thurston”) is employed by Five Star as an assistant superintendent. (Id.) Daniel Greci (“Greci”) is employed by Five Star as a general foreman. (Id.) Felix Valerio (“Valerio”) is employed by Five Star as a foreman. (Id.)
On February 27, 2017, Five Star hired Thomas as a journeyman electrician for jobsite located at 2 Broadway, New York, 10004. (Complaint at 104-06.) On or about March 15, 2017, Thomas was assigned to work with an apprentice named Marcin Sanik (“Sanik”). (Id. at 105.) After completing part of a project, foreman Valerio inspected their work and did not like the way it aesthetically looked. (Id.) While redoing the project to make it more visually attractive, Thomas attempted to calm Sanik's worries that they were repeating work and getting behind. (Id.) But when Thomas asked Sanik to complete other assignments, Sanik became “disgruntled,” and when Thomas rejected a suggestion by Sanik, Sanik became critical of Thomas and insubordinate. (Id.) Thomas told Sanik to see Valerio. (Id. at 105-06.) Sanik refused but his attitude seemed to settle down. (Id. at 106.)
Later that day, another confrontation occurred between Thomas and Sanik that was unrelated to work. (Id.) After the confrontation, Valerio inquired about what had transpired and attempted to defuse the situation. (Id.) In response, Valerio assigned Sanik to another task, leaving Thomas to work alone. (Id.)
Following that, Thomas and another journeyman electrician were assigned to a project. (Id. at 107.) Thomas determined that more electrical conduit was required for the project and went to the 30th floor to retrieve more. (Id.) While picking up the materials, Thomas overheard Valerio telling a male elevator operator details about previous times where other workers referred to Thomas as a “female.” (Id.) On turning a corner, Valerio was shocked to see Thomas standing there. (Id.) Thomas left, avoiding a conversation with Valerio. (Id.) Thomas alleges that after this incident some building workers started referring to him as female or asking him what his gender was. (Id.)
Afterwards, Thomas began keeping to himself as much as possible. (Id.) Thomas alleges Valerio noticed this and told Thomas that he was always to stay with his assigned work partner (excluding lunch and breaks). (Id.) Thomas further alleges Valerio stated that if either Thomas or his partner had to use the restroom, they “were to use the same stall.” (Id.) In addition to feeling a violation of personal space, Thomas felt that an MTA security guard was at times following him into the restroom “as if he was ordered to do so.” (Id.)
At some later point, Thomas overheard two coworkers discussing Thomas' phone screen saver, which was a picture of a shirtless male. (Id.) The two coworkers assumed that it was Thomas' “lover,” but in reality it was a picture of one of Thomas' best friends who had recently passed away. (Id.)
On or around March 21, 2017, Thomas asked general foreman Greci if he could leave work 15-20 minutes early to attend a set of weekly classes of continuing education for electricians. (Id. at 108.) Thomas offered to come in early to make up the time difference, but Greci said that was unnecessary and Thomas could leave at 2:00 p.m. without having his pay docked. (Id.) Thomas alleges that when Greci said that, Valerio gave Greci a “funny look.” (Id.) The following week, Thomas thought he would be able to leave at 2:00 p.m. for his class and went to the shanty to let Greci know that he was leaving. (Id.) Greci informed Thomas that he was not going to let Thomas leave early every week. (Id.) Thomas attempted to explain that was why he had previously offered to come in early, but Greci told Thomas that his pay would be docked if he left early. (Id.) Thomas stated that he was “willing to make the sacrifice for [his] education.” (Id.) Greci then told Thomas that if he left early the following week, Greci would lay Thomas off for leaving. (Id.) Thomas decided to stay. (Id.)
At some later point, Greci summoned Thomas to his office and the two had a conversation where Greci let Thomas know that Thomas was welcome at work and that if Thomas ever felt uncomfortable working with someone, he should tell Greci. (Id.)
Nevertheless, Thomas' isolation grew, and he alleges that the MTA's building maintenance workers began to notice Thomas' isolation. (Id. at 109.)
On another day, Thomas was late to work because the alarm set on his cellphone had not gone off. (Id.) Thomas assumed the alarm failed due to the recent daylight savings change but later found out it was due to a cell phone tower being down. (Id.) Thomas alleges that when he explained the situation, Greci seemed disinterested. (Id.)
On or around April 4, 2017, a clerical error in processing Thomas' union dues resulted in his being marked a no show at work. (Id. at 115, 126.) Greci ordered Thomas to leave the jobsite so that he could resolve the problem with his dues. (Id.) The next day, Thomas was given a formal warning due to Thomas' late arrivals, early departure, and unscheduled absences. (Stolzer Aff., Ex 2 at 7.) Thomas alleges that Greci was later unwilling to confirm that the union dues error was corrected. (Complaint at 115.)
On or around April 13, 2017, Thomas was again assigned Sanik as a partner for a project. (Id. at 109.) Thomas alleges that lies started to spread that he had told Sanik to work on top of an “energized switchgear with high currents.”[4] (Id. at 110, 113.) According to Sanik, Thomas told Sanik to get on top of a “VFD.”[5] (Id. at 110.) Thomas alleges that the main circuits to the VFD had been removed and that there was “no need to turn the power back on,” and further that he only suggested that Sanik use a ladder and climb less than four feet to tighten some screws. (Id. at 110-11.) During this incident, Sanik and Thomas began to yell at each other. (Id. at 112.) Foreman Valerio intervened and sent them both to see Greci. (Id.) Thomas alleges that while he told Greci what had really happened, Greci criticized Thomas as being unprofessional, yelling, and “ratting the apprentice out.” (Id.)
Greci decided to separate Thomas and Sanik and sent Sanik to assist in picking up a delivery. (Id.) However, when Thomas left Greci's office, Valerio also told Thomas to help with the delivery. (Id.) Thomas followed orders and went to the loading dock. (Id.) When Thomas saw Sanik he immediately turned around to avoid any further confrontation. (Id.) Thomas hung back near the freight elevator, but the two again had an encounter. (Id.) At one point, Sanik told Thomas that Thomas' eyes looked as if he wanted to kill Sanik. (Id.) Thomas replied, “if I wanted to kill you, you would already be dead, and there you stand alive and well.” (Id.) The two then got into an elevator where Thomas alleges Sanik goaded Thomas to hit him. (Id.)
Afterward, Thomas went to the MTA's security office and inquired about obtaining security video that he hoped had captured the previous incident between Thomas and Sanik. (Id. at 113.) The MTA security officer told Thomas that he should direct his inquiry to the building manager. (Id.) Thomas went to the building manager who directed him to Greci. (Id.) Thomas and Greci met in the shanty, and Greci asked why Thomas had been to the security office. (Id. at 114.) As Thomas began to relay the saga between him and Sanik, assistant superintendent Thurston interrupted and handed Thomas a layoff slip. (Complaint at 114; Stolzer Aff., Ex. 2 at 8.) Thomas asked for clarification and was told that he would find out more if he chose to file a grievance. (Complaint at 114.) Thomas turned in his security badge and left. (Id.)
Thomas states that Defendants' actions have had a “negative impact in his life, and negatively [a]ffect his employment and business opportunities and deter[r]ed his business opportunity of fulfilling his childhood dreams and future employment,” ultimately leading to the denial of “the right to his pursuit of happiness.” (Id. at 2.) Thomas further states that Defendants' actions “triggered his [gender] dysphoria causing health related issues,”...
To continue reading
Request your trial