PHILADELPHIA – In a recent lawsuit filed in state court, a Delaware woman alleges she was both sexually harassed by a maintenance worker at a Philadelphia veterinary clinic, and later fired for reporting that harassing conduct.
Nicole Peters of Middletown, Del. filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Oct. 29 versus The Pet Mechanic, LLC of Philadelphia.
Peters says she was hired on Jan. 29, 2017 as a receptionist at the defendant’s now-former location on North 3rd Street in the Northern Liberties neighborhood in Philadelphia (which has since moved to Fishtown). The plaintiff adds she was not provided an employee handbook.
In March 2017, The Pet Mechanic hired a maintenance worker named Gary, the suit says. On several occasions following his hire, Peters says she observed Gary flirting with and making sexual advances towards female employees, including defendant’s manager, Nicole Covatta, the suit says.
“On May 16, 2017, approximately one hour prior to their closing, plaintiff observed Gary attempting to flirt with a newly-hired, African-American female employee named Lovely. Plaintiff observed Lovely ignoring Gary’s sexual advances. At that time, plaintiff observed Gary yell 'You n—r b—tch' at Lovely, who appeared intimidated and did not respond,” the suit states.
“Plaintiff was disturbed by this outburst and approached Gary and asked if he had said what she thought he said. Gary responded that he had. Plaintiff responded that his statements were totally inappropriate and racist. Gary responded, 'How about I post [an image of] your a—s online, is that appropriate?'"
As Covatta was already gone for the day, Peters went next door to Doggie Style, LLC, also owned and operated by the defendant, to see if their manager was available and learn how to make a complaint about Gary’s conduct, the suit says. She alleges Gary followed her at that time and watched her from outside the premises, when she spoke with the manager on duty and explained what happened.
Peters says she was told to follow procedure as listed in the company handbook, but she replied that she had never been provided with one. Furthermore, Peters says she did not want to leverage her complaint until reading the appropriate section in the book, which she then received by e-mail on May 19, 2017. When it instructed her to report sexually harassing conduct immediately, Peters then reported the conduct to Covatta – who supposedly told the plaintiff that she had “done the right thing” and that the situation would be handled, the suit says.
On May 22, 2017, the defendant terminated Gary’s employment. However, the plaintiff found herself terminated just four days later, for the expressed reason of “not following the policy and reporting the incident involving Gary immediately," the suit says.
“As set forth above, complainant engaged in protected activity by making a complaint about sexual harassment and racial discrimination. Plaintiff’s sexual harassment and race discrimination complaint was a motivating factor in respondent’s decision,” according to the lawsuit.
In new matter filed Jan. 22, the defendant denied the plaintiff’s allegations and countered she did not present a claim upon which relief could be granted, failed to file an EEOC, PHRA and/or PFPO charge after the alleged conduct occurred, the conduct was not offensive to a reasonable person and the plaintiff was terminated for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons, among other arguments.
The plaintiffs responded to the new matter on Feb. 4, denying the new matter merely as conclusions of law.
For violation of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $75,000, jointly and severally, plus reinstatement of her position with a comparable salary and benefits including medical, vacation and sick time, plus any other associated employee benefits to which she may be entitled, compensatory damages, including back pay, front pay, past lost wages, future lost wages, lost pay increases, lost pay incentives, lost opportunity, lost benefits, lost future earning capacity, injury to reputation, mental and emotional distress, pain and suffering, punitive damages, attorney’s fees and costs of suit, interest, delay damages and any other relief the Court deems just, proper and equitable, in addition to a trial by jury.
The plaintiff is represented by Graham F. Baird of the Law Offices of Eric A. Shore, in Philadelphia.
The defendant is represented by Joel I. Fishbein and Susan M. Cirilli of Litchfield Cavo, also in Philadelphia.
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 181003843
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com