PITTSBURGH – A coach within Allegheny County’s Department of Human Services contends that she was retaliated against and fired from her role within the department, in response to her reporting alleged discrimination tactics against her for being an African-American woman.
Kameka Walters of Allegheny County filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on July 22 versus the Allegheny County Department of Human Services, of Pittsburgh.
“Plaintiff was employed by the defendant from on or about June 8, 2009, until her constructive discharge on or about July 19, 2021. At the time of the plaintiff’s constructive discharge, she held the position of Peer Coach. In or about 2019, plaintiff filed an internal complaint with the defendant’s Human Resources Department against her supervisor, Karen Rohley. Plaintiff complained of discrimination on the basis on her race, African-American. Thereafter, plaintiff was not promoted to the position of Head Coach. Similarly-situated Caucasian employees were promoted to the position of Head Coach by the defendant within one year of becoming a Peer Coach,” the suit says.
“In or about 2020, after the plaintiff returned from maternity leave, representatives of the defendant directed the plaintiff to copy her supervisor on all communications. Similarly-situated Caucasian employees and/or similarly situated employees that did not take maternity leave were not required by the defendant to copy their communications to a supervisor. At that time, defendant also did not permit the plaintiff to go to meetings with caseworkers unless she was accompanied by her manager, Gregory Phillips, Rohley and/or an employee with the position of Head Coach.”
The suit claims that Walters was discriminated against for being an African-American female and raising these concerns with management.
“In or about 2021, plaintiff applied for a Caseworker Supervisor position. Plaintiff was objectively qualified for that position. Plaintiff was not selected by the defendant for the position as Caseworker Supervisor. Instead, defendant selected eight Caucasian individuals and five African-American individuals for the position of Caseworker Supervisor. When the plaintiff inquired about the non-selection, she was informed that her supervisor indicated that the plaintiff needed to improve on her consistency. Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that her supervisor provided this feedback on her job performance based on the plaintiff’s race, African-American, and/or sex, female, and/or in retaliation for the plaintiff’s complaints of discrimination,” the suit states.
“Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that she was subjected to increased and unjustified scrutiny of her job performance to which other similarly-situated Caucasian individuals were not. Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that she was discriminated against by the defendant and not selected for the position of Caseworker Supervisor based on her race, African-American, her sex, female, and/or in retaliation for her complaint of discrimination. Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that the defendant’s conduct is part of a plan, pattern or practice of discrimination that may affect other similarly-situated individuals. On or about July 19, 2021, plaintiff was constructively discharged from her position as a result of the defendant’s ongoing conduct. As a direct and proximate result of the defendant’s actions, plaintiff has been adversely affected financially, professionally and emotionally.”
For counts of race discrimination, sex discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, plus violation of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, the plaintiff is seeking:
• That the Court enter a judgment declaring the defendant’s actions to be unlawful and violative of Title VII and the PHRA;
• That the Court award the plaintiff back pay damages and other benefits lost due to the defendant’s unlawful conduct plus interest from the date of discrimination;
• That the Court award the plaintiff compensatory and punitive damages as a result of the defendant’s actions being unlawful and violative of the PHRA;
• That the Court award the plaintiff pre-judgment and post-judgment interest from the date of the discrimination;
• That the Court award the plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of this action; and
• That the Court grant the plaintiff such additional relief as may be just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Joel S. Sansone of the Law Offices of Joel Sansone, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant has not yet obtained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:22-cv-01051
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com