PHILADELPHIA – A cleaning technician at Drexel University alleges he was discriminated against for his Islamic faith on multiple occasions and later fired from his role, in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Brandon Hamilton filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Dec. 5 versus Drexel University and Clean-Tech Services, Inc. All parties are of Philadelphia.
“On or about Thursday, March 23, 2023, plaintiff requested to take time-off during Ramadan, which was scheduled to start Friday, March 24, 2023. On March 23, 2023, plaintiff’s supervisor, Ms. Jacqueline Brown, a management employee of defendant Clean-Tech Services, Inc., denied plaintiff’s request to take time-off from work for Ramadan for Friday, March 24, 2023. Since he could not take off from work during Ramadan, plaintiff requested the ability instead to take breaks during Ramadan, during the day, to pray,” the suit says.
“Ms. Brown, supervisor/manager, commented that plaintiff would only be permitted 15 minutes to pray, or words to that effect. In or around March and April 2023, when plaintiff entered the break room to pray during Ramadan, he was discriminated against by his co-employees. A co-employee stated, ‘What does he have in that bag?’, or words to that effect, on one occasion when plaintiff entered the break room in order to pray.”
The suit adds that another co-employee stated, on another occasion, “Check on him to make sure he’s praying,’ or words to that effect, when plaintiff entered the break room in order to pray.”
“Plaintiff also recollects that at the beginning of his employment, Ms. Brown, supervisor/manager, asked plaintiff what was on his forehead. Plaintiff commented that it was a prostration mark from praying. On another occasion, Ms. Brown commented to plaintiff, ‘You grew up Christian,’ and ‘You ate Christmas dinners,’ or words to that effect. Plaintiff filed an EEOC Charge against defendants on April 17, 2023, alleging discrimination and failure-to-accommodate his religion. On April 18, 2023, Ms. Brown, the supervisor, discriminated against and retaliated against plaintiff by disciplining plaintiff based on a pretext. Ms. Brown disciplined
plaintiff for allegedly not sweeping the floor. Plaintiff was washing the windows first, while waiting for visitors to clear the museum area before he started sweeping the floor,” the suit states.
“On April 26, 2023, plaintiff was wrongfully terminated from his employment by defendants. On April 26, 2023, at the time plaintiff’s termination was communicated to him, plaintiff was informed that Drexel no longer wanted him in the building anymore, or words to that effect. It is believed and averred that Drexel constitutes a decision-maker with respect to plaintiff’s termination. It is believed and therefore averred that plaintiff was replaced by an employee who is not Muslim. Defendants wrongfully terminated plaintiff from his employment based on his religion in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
For counts of failure to accommodate religion, wrongful termination based on religion, retaliatory discharge/termination, retaliation/direct retaliation and harassment/hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the plaintiff is seeking, jointly and severally, damages in excess of $150,000, which will fully and fairly compensate plaintiff for any and all back and front pay, overtime, benefits, bonuses, commissions, and promotions he would have received; compensatory damages for pain and suffering, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment and emotional distress; punitive damages; pre- and post-judgment interest, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs of suit; and equitable/injunctive relief requiring defendants to provide a neutral employment reference for plaintiff, equitable/injunctive relief requiring defendants to conduct sensitivity training for all of defendants’ employees; and such other and further relief that this Court deems just, proper, and equitable.
The plaintiff is represented by Justin F. Robinette in Philadelphia.
The defendants have not yet obtained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-04791
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com