Yangambi v. Providence Sch. Bd., 2014–281–Appeal
| Decision Date | 23 June 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 2014–282–Appeal (PC 04–6001),No. 2014–281–Appeal,2014–281–Appeal,2014–282–Appeal (PC 04–6001) |
| Parties | Matthieu W. YANGAMBI v. PROVIDENCE SCHOOL BOARD et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
For Plaintiff: Gina A. DiCenso, Esq., V. Edward Formisano, Esq., Nicole J. Policastro, Esq., Michael D. Pushee, Esq.
For Defendants: Kevin F. McHugh, Esq., Megan K. DiSanto, Esq., Kathryn M. Sabatini, Esq.
Present: Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Flaherty, Robinson, and Indeglia, JJ.
The parties in this case are before the Supreme Court on cross-appeals from a Superior Court judgment following a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff, Matthieu W. Yangambi (plaintiff or Dr. Yangambi), on a single claim of employment discrimination based on national origin. The defendants, the Providence School Board and the City of Providence (Providence or defendants), have challenged the Superior Court justice's jury instructions on several grounds and argue that the Superior Court justice: (1) applied an incorrect law concerning evidentiary presumptions in an employment discrimination case; (2) improperly weighed the evidence; and (3) invaded the province of the jury. The defendants also contend that the Superior Court justice erred when she vacated the jury's finding that the plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages. The plaintiff's cross-appeal arises from the denial of a motion for judgment as a matter of law on a separate count in the complaint that also alleged employment discrimination. The plaintiff contends that the defendants failed to satisfy their burden of production, they did not articulate a nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment decision, and therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. For the reasons discussed herein, all appeals are denied and dismissed, and the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.
Doctor Yangambi, who is of African descent, immigrated to this country from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (the Congo) and, the evidence disclosed, speaks English with a pronounced French accent. He graduated with a Bachelor's degree in biomedical sciences from the University of Kinshasa in the Congo. He was a full-time high school teacher in the Congo for two years and also taught high school science part-time in Gabon, a neighboring country, for three years. While in Gabon, Dr. Yangambi also worked in a supervisory capacity at a nephrology department for ten years, working with nursing students as they transitioned from academia to practice. Doctor Yangambi immigrated to the United States in February 1990.
In 1992, Dr. Yangambi began his teaching career with Providence as a substitute physics teacher at Hope High School.1 In 1993, he was hired as a full-time biology and physiology teacher at Mount Pleasant High School (Mount Pleasant), where he currently is employed. In 1998, Dr. Yangambi received his Master's degree in administration from Providence College and his certification to be a middle or high school principal. In 2006, he earned a doctorate in educational leadership from Johnson & Wales University.
During the term of his employment, Dr. Yangambi applied for approximately forty2 positions within the Providence School Department (the Department), but he was rejected every time. In 2003, Dr. Yangambi filed a charge of discrimination with the Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights (the commission), claiming that Providence had failed to promote him based on his national origin. On October 7, 2004, the commission issued a right to sue notice; and, on November 5, 2004, Dr. Yangambi filed an employment discrimination suit, charging that Providence violated the Fair Employment Practices Act (FEPA) and the Rhode Island Civil Rights Act (Civil Rights Act) by failing to promote him to numerous administrative positions based on his national origin. In November 2007, Dr. Yangambi filed an amended complaint, averring that Providence had again failed to promote him based not only on his national origin,3 but also in retaliation for his claims of employment discrimination. The case was tried before a jury in March and April of 2014.4
This appeal is confined to two of the positions that were not awarded to Dr. Yangambi; each application was for an opening as assistant principal at Mount Pleasant—the first, in 2002 (2002 Position) and the second, in 2004 (2004 Position).
In May 2002, an opening was announced for the 2002 Position; the posting required that the applicant possess three years of teaching experience and a certification by the Rhode Island Department of Education (the Department of Education) for a secondary principal. Doctor Yangambi, who met these requirements, applied for the 2002 Position; however, he was not interviewed,5 nor was he notified that he did not meet the minimum qualifications for the position. According to Gail Hareld (Hareld), a human resources administrator for Providence, applicants who met the minimum qualifications generally were forwarded to the hiring committee, and those who were not deemed qualified were notified by Providence. It is not contested that, in 2002, Dr. Yangambi met the teaching experience and requisite certification requirements established by the Department of Education. Specifically, Dr. Yangambi had approximately fifteen years of teaching experience, ten years of supervisory experience in a hospital setting, and had obtained a secondary principal certificate. He had been at Mount Pleasant since 1993. Nonetheless, Dr. Yangambi received neither an interview nor a rejection letter from Providence. The defendant offered no explanation for this circumstance.
The position was awarded to John Craig (Craig). Craig testified that, at the time of the posting, he was serving as acting assistant principal at Mount Pleasant and that he previously had served as an assistant principal in Johnston for approximately one-and-a-half years. Craig had fourteen years of teaching experience; and, in 1999, he received a Master's degree in administration from Providence College. He explained that he obtained his secondary principal certification shortly after earning his Master's degree. Specifically regarding the 2002 Position, Craig testified that, while working in Johnston, he was encouraged to contact the principal at Mount Pleasant at the time, Nancy Mullen (Principal Mullen), about an assistant principal vacancy; however, he understood that "it would only be an acting [position], and [by] taking that position [he] would be taking a risk of not getting the [permanent] position * * *." Although Craig testified at trial that he was interviewed for the position, this testimony conflicted with his deposition testimony in which he admitted that he was not interviewed. Nonetheless, Craig could not remember the names of anyone who conducted the interview but was confident that Principal Mullen did not participate. He recalled that the majority of members on the interview panel were from the human resources department. Craig's testimony that Principal Mullen did not participate in the interview is in conflict with Providence's hiring policies, as set forth by Hareld and other witnesses, and that formed the basis of the defense in this case. That policy required administrators from the particular school to be involved in the interview process.6
Providence failed to produce evidence about who, if anyone, including Craig, was in fact interviewed in 2002, what name or names were forwarded to the Superintendent, who were the members of the interview committee, or how the candidates were ranked. Further, despite the irrefutable evidence that Dr. Yangambi met the qualifications for the 2002 Position, there was no testimony or other evidence produced that explained why Dr. Yangambi was not granted an interview for the 2002 Position.
Numerous witnesses testified on behalf of Providence and offered testimony about the general hiring procedures that were in place in Providence. According to Hareld,7 the procedure required that an open position was to be posted—for a minimum of ten days—setting forth the minimum qualifications necessary for the position. Hareld testified that the names of applicants who met the minimum qualifications would be forwarded to the interview committee for an interview. The interview committee was composed of a range of individuals, depending on the type and location of the vacancy, and chaired by a chairperson, usually an administrator from the hiring school. Importantly, regardless of the position or the location, a Providence human resources representative and an equal employment opportunity (EEO) officer often served on each interview committee. Hareld explained that the members of the interview committee would pose questions, which were determined in advance, to each applicant and rate the response on a scale of one to five. After the scores were tallied, the names of the top two or three applicants were recommended to the Superintendent, who would forward his or her recommendation to Providence. Providence would then vote on whether to award the position to the recommended applicant.
Joyce O'Connor (O'Connor), Providence's EEO officer from 1986 to 2012,8 also testified and corroborated Hareld's testimony about Providence's hiring practices.9 Although O'Connor testified that one of her responsibilities as an EEO officer was "to see that basically the candidates were treated fairly during the interview * * *," she too could not offer any testimony about the 2002 interview committee, who was interviewed, or who was recommended to the Superintendent. Providence failed to produce any ranking sheets or other documentary evidence and was unable to identify the other candidates, if any, who were interviewed for the position. In the fall of 2003, Dr. Yangambi filed a complaint with the commission.
While Dr. Yangambi's complaint was pending before the commission, he applied for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mangiarelli v. Town of Johnston
...instructions given to the jury by the trial justice. "Our review of jury instructions is de novo." Yangambi v. Providence School Board, 162 A.3d 1205, 1216 (R.I. 2017). "[T]his Court examines jury instructions 'in their entirety to ascertain the manner in which a jury of ordinarily intellig......
-
City of Providence v. Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights
...this third prong, a plaintiff must do more than simply cast doubt upon the employer's justification." Yangambi v. Providence School Bd., 162 A.3d 1205 (R.I. 2017) (quoting Resare v. Raytheon Co., 981 F.2d 32, 42 (1st Cir. 1992)). A Ms. Zabala's Prima Facie Case A prima facie case based upon......
-
City of Providence v. Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights
...this third prong, a plaintiff must do more than simply cast doubt upon the employer's justification." Yangambi v. Providence School Bd., 162 A.3d 1205 (R.I. 2017) (quoting Resare v. Raytheon Co., 981 F.2d 32, 42 (1st Cir. 1992)). A Ms. Zabala's Prima Facie Case A prima facie case based upon......
-
City of Providence v. Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights
...this third prong, a plaintiff must do more than simply cast doubt upon the employer's justification." Yangambi v. Providence School Bd., 162 A.3d 1205 (R.I. 2017) (quoting Resare v. Raytheon Co., 981 F.2d 32, 42 (1st Cir. 1992)). A Ms. Zabala's Prima Facie Case A prima facie case based upon......