[Name Withheld]
[Address Withheld]
[State & ZIP Code Withheld]
[Phone Number Withheld]
[Email Address Withheld]
Plaintiff in pro per
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
[NAME WITHHELD],
Plaintiff,
vs.
[NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; [NAME WITHHELD]; and [NAME WITHHELD] LLC,
Defendant(s)
)
)
Case No.:
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
NOW COMES [Name Withheld], Plaintiff, and files this Complaint against [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], [Name Withheld], and [Name Withheld] LLC, Defendants, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:
PARTIES
Plaintiff [Name Withheld] is a law-abiding female adult of sound mind and a resident of [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a male adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a female adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a male adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a male adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a male adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a female adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a female adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] is a male adult of sound mind whose address known to Plaintiff is [Address Withheld].
Defendant [Name Withheld] LLC is a company registered under the laws of the State of Ohio that manufactures axles for light vehicles.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
Jurisdiction exists in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 since this is a lawsuit of violation of Plaintiff’s rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Jurisdiction exists in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 since the amount of controversy is more than $75,000.
Venue is proper in this Court since the events and causes of action described herein took place in Toledo, which is within the Northern District of Ohio.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiff filed a complaint of discrimination and harassment.
One defendant is falsely identified as Plaintiff’s coworker in the company’s position statement.
This individual was actually Plaintiff’s production supervisor and approached her station early in the morning, insisting she get up without explanation.
He then attempted to reach for the chair in which Plaintiff was seated, leading to a verbal dispute between the two.
Contrary to the company statement, Plaintiff was escorted from the production line with her belongings and threatened with being “walked out” and having her badge confiscated.
Another colleague, acting as a stand-in superintendent with authority in the matter, did not impose any disciplinary action.
Plaintiff was not informed of any investigation or outcome after a grievance meeting with management.
Another witness, a fellow assembly technician, also spoke out against the supervisor’s behavior during the dispute.
Plaintiff confirmed his actions and ongoing workplace discrimination between him and the younger female technicians.
Plaintiff did not make any sexual harassment claims regarding the incident, but did report hostility and threatening behavior by him to her supervisors.
Both Plaintiff and a witness reported that the supervisor showed partiality towards younger female technicians and the company failed to investigate these allegations.
The company attempted to suppress evidence of a hostile dispute between Plaintiff and the supervisor and falsely suggested that her allegations were against a coworker.
A female employee reviewed text messages but the company failed to address evidence of sexual harassment by another male employee towards Plaintiff.
Despite the company’s no-tolerance policy for sexual harassment and threats, the employee reviewing the messages did not have enough “information” to confirm harassment.
Sexual harassment is defined as unwanted sexual conduct, physical contact, or threats of undesired contact among other behaviors.
Due to union membership, the employee reported for sexual harassment underwent progressive discipline and the information was kept on file instead of immediate termination.
Physical threats of violence were made by a team lead, but no disciplinary action was taken despite the collective agreement.
A superintendent’s statement that rules and policies are not always of equal application highlighted the lack of concern towards harassment.
Offensive comments, unwanted physical contact, or any threats of undesired contact are considered forms of harassment.
One supervisor made statements demanding to keep “your girl” off his line before “getting in her ass.”
On another date, a male operator made unpleasant remarks to Plaintiff about her sexuality, work position, wages, and place of origin.
Plaintiff confronted him and her team leader was present at the station witnessing the altercation.
The team leader encouraged Plaintiff not to let the incident affect her job and reminded her of past statements she had written to the union.
On a later date, another male employee approached Plaintiff aggressively, threatened her with gun play, and mentioned involving someone outside the plant.
Plaintiff confided in her brother, but without speaking to her, he walked down to the location to confront the threats made.
Plaintiff was harassed and threatened by a man who was bigger and older than her.
The use of Plaintiff’s brother as an intimidation tactic is inconsistent with the investigation’s findings.
Plaintiff and her brother did not communicate initially about what happened when she first approached his line crying.
Plaintiff did not encourage her brother to approach the individual when walking towards the line.
Plaintiff walked off towards another section, and the male employee followed.
As per the collective agreement, all notices of discharge and disciplinary layoffs are to be given to the union 24 hours before action is taken.
Plaintiff was placed on suspension pending investigation.
The notice of Plaintiff’s discharge was issued to the bargaining committee the following morning. No proper investigation was conducted.
CAUSES OF ACTION
Count I: Hostile Working Environment
Plaintiff hereby incorporates all the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint by reference as though set out in full herein.
Hostility in the workplace was reported by Plaintiff and a witness, who both confirmed that a supervisor showed partiality towards younger female technicians.
Offensive comments, unwanted physical contact, or any threats of undesired contact are considered forms of harassment.
Plaintiff was harassed and threatened by a male employee who was bigger and older than her.
Supervisors made statements and threats of violence, but no disciplinary action was taken.
The company failed to investigate allegations of sexual harassment and attempted to suppress evidence of the hostile dispute.
In relevant case law, the court held that a hostile work environment based on gender is viable under Title VII even if not explicitly sexual.
Defendants are liable for creating a hostile working environment and ought to pay damages.
Count II: Retaliation
Plaintiff hereby incorporates all the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint by reference as though set out in full herein.
Plaintiff reported the hostile and threatening behavior she experienced and was subsequently placed on a suspension pending investigation.
Despite the incident, no disciplinary action was taken against the supervisor.
Plaintiff’s brother confronted threats made against her and requested union involvement.
Plaintiff was then placed on suspension, suggesting retaliation.
In precedent case law, failure to take corrective action after a complaint of harassment can constitute retaliation.
Defendants are liable for retaliation and ought to pay damages.
Count III: Discrimination
Plaintiff hereby incorporates all the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint by reference as though set out in full herein.
Plaintiff reported hostility and threatening behavior to her supervisors.
Plaintiff confirmed ongoing workplace discrimination involving younger female technicians.
Both Plaintiff and a witness reported partiality and the company failed to investigate.
Supervisors made discriminatory statements.
The company suppressed evidence and misrepresented Plaintiff’s allegations.
Plaintiff was placed on suspension without proper investigation.
Employer targeting for micromanagement and excessive scrutiny can constitute discrimination under Title VII.
Defendants are liable and ought to pay damages.
Count IV: Sexual Harassment
Plaintiff hereby incorporates all the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint by reference as though set out in full herein.
Sexual harassment includes unwanted conduct and threats of contact.
Examples include offensive remarks, threats of gun play, and hostile language.
Supervisors and coworkers made inappropriate and threatening statements.
Court precedent supports that offensive language or suggestive material constitutes sexual harassment.
Defendants are liable and ought to pay damages.
Count V: Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff hereby incorporates all the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint by reference as though set out in full herein.
Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sex and other protected characteristics.
Elements include employment relationship, adverse action, and discriminatory intent.
The foregoing facts show violations of Title VII.
Defendants are liable and ought to pay damages.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
REASONS WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to GRANT the following reliefs:
GRANT judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants;
AWARD Plaintiff damages for hostile working environment, retaliation, discrimination, sexual harassment, and violation of Title VII amounting to $__________;
AWARD Plaintiff punitive damages;
AWARD Plaintiff attorney fees and costs of this suit;
AWARD Plaintiff such equitable relief as this Court deems fair; and
AWARD Plaintiff such further relief as this Court deems proper.
Dated this _____ day of April, 2023.
Respectfully Submitted,
[Name Withheld]
Plaintiff in pro per
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )