PHILADELPHIA – A Black Delaware County special education professional contends that she was demoted from a new role she applied for, simply because her White predecessor opted to re-apply for the role after initially stepping aside.
Tamika Pitchford filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 1 versus William Penn School District. All parties are of Lansdowne.
“Ms. Tamika Pitchford is an African-American female. On Sept. 10, 2019, Pitchford was excited to be selected for the position of Special Education Department Head. Significantly, throughout her employment and all times relevant hereto, Pitchford performed her duties in an excellent manner, received positive performance reviews and had ample qualification for the instant promotion. Pitchford decided to apply for the position when she was made aware that Ms. Rebecca Vandenberg, the Department Head for the past several years, had decided not to run for an additional term,” the suit says.
“In fact, Vandenberg, a White female, made an open and notorious comment that she did not intended to seek an additional term. Pitchford timely applied for the position and was given at least two separate interviews for the position, including at least one with defendant’s employee Joe Conley. Pitchford was awarded the position and yet, in the short term of her new position, Pitchford was subjected to ridicule and harassment by administrators and discriminated against. Upon information, Vandenberg provided an email after the deadline for application for the position had lapsed, that she indeed desired to run for the position for a new term.”
The suit adds that Vandenberg’s email did not comply with the District’s own policy in regards to re-applying for her role.
“In fact, the EEOC found that defendant, when asked about Vandenberg’s compliance provided little with regard to a proper response. Defendant demoted Pitchford, giving the position back to Vandenberg and explaining that the Union policy compels that Vandenberg continue in the position. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the instant decision was based on racist animus, discrimination based on race and in contravention of the rights bestowed by the U.S. Constitution,” the suit states.
“Defendant had a general policy and ongoing practice of discriminating against non-White and particularly, African-American employees. This policy was manifested in the following ways: Demoting African-American employees, namely the plaintiff, on the basis of race and not performance and failing and refusing to take adequate steps to eliminate the effects of its past discriminatory practices. The discriminatory demotion by defendant was clear and manifest. Defendant discriminated against Pitchford based on her race.”
For counts of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act and 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, the plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages, actual damages, damages for her emotional and psychological pain-related injuries, punitive damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs of suit and attorney’s fees, plus such other relief as the Court deems just and proper and a trial by jury.
The plaintiff is represented by Michael A. Walker of The Law Office of Michael A. Walker, in Norristown.
The defendant has not yet obtained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:22-cv-03021
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com