Von Maack v. Wyckoff Heights Med. Ctr.
| Decision Date | 21 June 2016 |
| Docket Number | 15 Civ. 3951 (ER) |
| Parties | DOROTA VON MAACK, Plaintiff, v. WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Ramos, D.J.:
Pro se Plaintiff Dorota Von Maack ("Plaintiff") brings this action against Wyckoff Heights Medical Center ("Defendant" or "Wyckoff"), alleging, inter alia, breach of a collective bargaining agreement, employment discrimination, and retaliation. Before the Court are Defendant's motion to dismiss the Complaint and Plaintiff's motion to vacate an arbitration award. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant's motion is GRANTED and Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to file an Amended Complaint.
Plaintiff is a Queens, New York resident who has worked as a pharmacist for over fifteen years. Compl. at 1, 7. From November 15, 2004 to August 11, 2011, Plaintiff was employed byDefendant Wyckoff Heights Medical Center, a healthcare facility located in Brooklyn. Id. at 1 & Ex. 6.2 At all relevant times during her employment, Plaintiff's supervisor was Joseph Rumore, Wyckoff's Pharmacy Director ("Director Rumore"). Id. at 5. During her employment, Plaintiff was a member of a union, 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East ("1199"). Id. at 10 ¶ 4. The terms and conditions of her employment were governed by a collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") between Wyckoff and 1199. Id., Ex. 4.
Plaintiff alleges that while she worked at Wyckoff, she was subjected to a number of discriminatory practices based on her race, national origin, immigration status, sex, disability, religion, and age. Id. at 7. Chief among her discrimination claims in this suit is that she was treated less favorably than other employees because she is an immigrant from Poland and a naturalized, as opposed to native born, U.S. citizen. See, e.g., id. at 7, 49-50. Plaintiff essentially alleges that her workplace was divided between "favored" employees, like American-born pharmacists Larry Coppola and Maria Esposito, and "non-favored" employees, like herself. Id. at 7.
Among other discriminatory acts, Plaintiff alleges that: she was subjected to discriminatory shift scheduling, whereby she was scheduled to work five days per week while favored pharmacists, including Coppola and Esposito, worked only four days per week, id. at 7 & Ex. 9; she was assigned more work than favored pharmacists and, unlike favored pharmacists, was not permitted to ask pharmacy technicians for help, id. at 8-9 ¶ 3; she was subjected to excessive discipline compared to favored employees, id. at 10-12 ¶¶ 5-6; and she was made toperform the least desirable assignments, which included making chemotherapy and intravenous medications in a compounding room that she alleges did not meet industry safety standards, id. at 8 ¶ 2. Plaintiff alleges that working in the compounding room caused her to lose weight, to frequently suffer colds, bronchitises, and pneumonias, and, later, to acquire three diseases that affect her lungs—bronchiectasis, atelectasis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ("COPD"). Id. at 8 ¶ 2, 19-20 ¶¶ 29-31.3 Plaintiff also alleges that Wyckoff owes her over $30,000 in wages by the terms of the CBA. Id. at 10 ¶ 4.4
Throughout her employment, Plaintiff complained to her supervisor, Wyckoff officials, her union, and others regarding discriminatory treatment, issues of workplace safety, and violations of the CBA. Id. at 15 ¶¶ 16-18. At some point, Defendant introduced a rotation system to address some of the issues Plaintiff raised about shift scheduling and assignments, but many of Plaintiff's concerns had still not been addressed. Id. at 15 ¶ 17. Plaintiff alleges that she and other employees became dissatisfied with the conditions at Wyckoff and with their union representation, and on June 9, 2009, Plaintiff and her fellow pharmacists at Wyckoff signed a petition, addressed to Wyckoff's then-CEO, requesting immediate negotiations for a new employment contract. Id. at 16 ¶ 19 & Ex. 17. Plaintiff delivered the petition in person. Id. at 16 ¶ 19.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant retaliated against her for her complaints, particularly after she delivered the June 9 petition. Id. One such incident occurred not long thereafter. Plaintiffalleges that on June 13, 2009, she became so sick from her exposure in the compounding room that she had to be hospitalized. Id. at 16 ¶ 20. Plaintiff returned to work after four days with a discharge note from NYU Medical Center, id., Ex. 18, but, according to Plaintiff, Director Rumore refused to see the note and instead accused her of going on a ski vacation. Id. at 16 ¶ 20. Plaintiff alleges that, in an act of retaliation, Director Rumore made her work alone in the hospital without support from other personnel. Id. When Plaintiff reported the incident in the pharmacy "communication book," she was given a disciplinary notice and suspended for three days. Id. at 16-17 ¶ 20. When she returned to work on July 21, Director Rumore ordered a security guard to escort her off the premises, allegedly to further intimidate her. Id. at 17 ¶ 21. Plaintiff complained about the incident to Wyckoff officials, including Wyckoff's Human Resources Director, Margaret Cornelius, and Compliance Officer, Claire Mullally, but to no avail. Id. at 17-18 ¶¶ 21-26. Plaintiff also filed a grievance request with her union about the incident, but the union declined to file a grievance on her behalf. Id. at 17 ¶ 21.
Plaintiff's health continued to worsen in 2010. Id. at 19-21 ¶¶ 29-36. Plaintiff claims that she informed Defendant about her health conditions and requested that she not be scheduled to work in the compounding room for multiple days in a row. Id. at 19 ¶ 29. Although favored employees were allegedly granted similar requests, Plaintiff's requests were denied. Id. According to Plaintiff, she was scheduled to work in the compounding room more frequently as a result of her requests. Id. at 21 ¶ 36. Plaintiff also claims that she requested medical leaves, which were denied. Id. at 20 ¶ 31. In late 2010, Plaintiff warned Director Rumore that if the health and safety violations in the pharmacy were not remedied, she would notify federal and state authorities. Id. at 20 ¶ 32.
Plaintiff's complaints persisted throughout 2011. At a February 10, 2011 union meeting, Plaintiff and others raised a number of issues with union organizers, including complaints about scheduling and wages, and the need for upgrades to bring the compounding room up to industry standards. Id. at 21-22 ¶ 37. According to Plaintiff, the union did not file grievances on the members' behalf. Id. at 22 ¶ 37. In July, Plaintiff sent letters reiterating those complaints to Wyckoff officials, but she received no response. Id. at 23-24 ¶¶ 39, 41. Also in July, Plaintiff began the process of initiating a workers' compensation claim. Id. at 24 ¶ 40.
Meanwhile, Plaintiff received more disciplinary notices, ultimately leading to her termination. On July 5, 2011, Plaintiff received a disciplinary notice and five-day suspension stemming from an incident occurring on May 28, 2011. Id. at 22 ¶ 38 & Ex. 27. On that date, Director Rumore ordered Plaintiff and pharmacist Esposito to prepare TPN (a form of liquid nutrition). Id. Plaintiff and Esposito refused the order, since it was not accompanied by a prior official memorandum, in violation of Wyckoff's policies and procedures. Id. According to Plaintiff, Director Rumore only created the required memorandum after the fact, on June 6, 2011. Id. Unlike Plaintiff, pharmacist Esposito was not disciplined for the incident. Id. at 23 ¶ 38. Plaintiff maintains that she did nothing to deserve punishment, and that she only received the disciplinary notice and suspension so that Director Rumore could have a reason to later fire her. Id. at 22-23 ¶ 38.
The incident that led to Plaintiff's ultimate dismissal took place a few weeks later, on July 30, 2011. That day, the pharmacy was understaffed, and Plaintiff alleges that she was too busy working to accept a package. Id. at 24-25 ¶ 42. Despite the fact that another pharmacist and a technician were present, Plaintiff was blamed for refusing the delivery and for letting the delivery driver wander the pharmacy unsupervised. Id. at 24-25 ¶ 42 & Ex. 34. Plaintiff allegesthat Director Rumore intentionally understaffed the pharmacy that day. Id. at 24 ¶ 42. She also claims that the technician on duty later admitted to setting Plaintiff up at the request of Director Rumore. Id. at 28-29 ¶ 52.
Plaintiff complained about these disciplinary incidents before she was ultimately fired. A grievance process was initiated, and a formal grievance meeting took place on August 2. Id. at 25 ¶ 44. Present were Director Rumore, Wyckoff Vice President Frances Heaney, Wyckoff Labor Relations Manager Joseph Foti, and two 1199 organizers. Id. Plaintiff alleges that three minutes into the meeting, when she began "to explain the whole situation, everybody in the room got up and left [the] room without saying one word." Id. at 25-26 ¶ 44.
Plaintiff also lodged a complaint against Director Rumore with Human Resources, and on August 4, 2011, she met with Labor Relations Manager Foti to discuss her allegations of harassment and unfair treatment. Id. at 26 ¶ 44 & Ex. 7. Plaintiff alleges that Foti ended the meeting after only a few minutes. Id. at 26 ¶ 44.
On August 5, Plaintiff submitted a safety and health hazard notice to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ("OSHA") about the conditions in the compounding room. Id. at 27 ¶ 47.5 The same day, she sent a letter to Wyckoff's Compliance Officer, Claire Mullally, regarding her medical condition and discrimination, id. at 26 ¶ 45, and her workers' compensation claim was booked with the New York State Workers' Compensation Board, id. at 26 ¶ 46.
Almost one week later, on August 11, 2011, Plaintiff received a disciplinary...
To continue reading
Request your trial