Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2_
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 1 of 18 PagelD #: 2
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
`FORT SMITH DIVISION
`
`Civil Action File No. o[ . o | 5
`
`UY
`
`)
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`
`) )
`
`)
`
`EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
`COMMISSION
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv
`
`HOSPITAL HOUSEKEEPING
`SYSTEMS,LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`This is an action under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §12101, et
`
`$eq., as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADA), and
`
`Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §198 1a, to correct unlawful employmentpractices
`
`on the basis of disability andto provide appropriate relief to Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez,
`
`Vernestine Gibbs, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and a class of former employees who were adversely
`
`affected by such practices.
`
`Asalleged with greater particularity below, Defendant Hospital Housekeeping Systems,
`
`LLC (Defendant or HHS) subjected Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez, Vernestine Gibbs,
`
`Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry and a class of former employees to an unlawful qualifications standard,
`
`an Essential Functions Test, that screened out or tended to screen out a class of individuals with
`
`disabilities and subjected them to an adverse employmentaction, termination, after they failed the
`
`Essential Functions Test. HHS’s use ofthe Essential Functions Test adversely impacts employees
`
`with disabilities and constitutes a qualification standard that unlawfully screens out or tends to
`
`
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 1 of 18 PagelD #: 2
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
`FORT SMITH DIVISION
`
`Civil Action File No. o[ . o | 5
`
`UY
`
`)
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`
`) )
`
`)
`
`EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
`COMMISSION
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv
`
`HOSPITAL HOUSEKEEPING
`SYSTEMS,LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`This is an action under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §12101, et
`
`$eq., as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADA), and
`
`Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §198 1a, to correct unlawful employmentpractices
`
`on the basis of disability andto provide appropriate relief to Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez,
`
`Vernestine Gibbs, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and a class of former employees who were adversely
`
`affected by such practices.
`
`Asalleged with greater particularity below, Defendant Hospital Housekeeping Systems,
`
`LLC (Defendant or HHS) subjected Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez, Vernestine Gibbs,
`
`Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry and a class of former employees to an unlawful qualifications standard,
`
`an Essential Functions Test, that screened out or tended to screen out a class of individuals with
`
`disabilities and subjected them to an adverse employmentaction, termination, after they failed the
`
`Essential Functions Test. HHS’s use ofthe Essential Functions Test adversely impacts employees
`
`with disabilities and constitutes a qualification standard that unlawfully screens out or tends to
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 2 of 18 PagelD #: 3
`
`screen out a class of individuals with disabilities. The Commission alleges the Essential Functions
`
`Test is not job-related and consistent with business necessity.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`I.
`
`Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,
`
`1343 and 1345. This action is authorized andinstituted pursuant to §107(a) of the Americans with
`
`Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference
`
`§§706(f)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-
`
`5(f)(1) and (3) and pursuant to § 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
`
`2.
`
`The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and continue to be
`
`committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of
`
`Arkansas.
`
`PARTIES
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Commission)is the agency
`
`of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement
`
`of Titles I and V of the ADAandis expressly authorized to bring this action by §107(a) of the
`
`ADA,42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference §§706(f)(1) and (3) and §707 of
`
`Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) and § 2000e-6.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Hospital Housekeeping Systems, LLC (HHS), a foreign limited liability
`
`company headquartered in Dripping Springs, Texas, operates in hospitals in approximately thirty
`
`States throughout the United States. HHS operates housekeeping services at facilities in Fort
`
`Smith, Helena-West Helena, Forrest City, and Little Rock, Arkansas and in Memphis, Dyersburg,
`
`and Clarksville, Tennessee, and Olive Branch, MS. At these hospitals, HHS required the Essential
`
`Functions Test that was not job-related and consistent with business necessity.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 3 of 18 PagelD #: 4
`
`5.
`
`At all relevant times, HHS has continuously been an employer engaged in an
`
`industry affecting commerce under §§101(5) and 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111(5), (7).
`
`6.
`
`Atall relevant times, HHS has been a covered entity under §101(2) of the ADA,
`
`42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
`
`7.
`
`At all relevant times, HHS has continuously been doing business in the state of
`
`Arkansas and across the United States and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
`
`
`
`ADMINISTRATIVEPROCEDURES
`
`8.
`
`More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Rodney Roberts,
`
`George Rodriquez, Vernestine Gibbs, Kathryn Gill, and Debra Parry filed charges with the
`
`Commission alleging violations of the ADA by HHS.
`
`9.
`
`On February 12, 2021, the Commission issued to HHS Letters of Determination
`
`finding reasonable cause to believe HHS violated the ADA with respect to Rodney Roberts,
`
`George Rodriquez Vernestine Gibbs, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and a class of aggrieved
`
`individuals and invited HHSto join with the Commission in informal methodsof conciliation to
`
`endeavorto eliminate the unlawful employmentpractices and provide appropriate relief.
`
`10.
`
`|The Commission engaged in communications with HHS to provide HHS the
`
`opportunity to remedy the discriminatory practices described in the Letters of Determination.
`
`11.|The Commission was unable to secure from HHSa conciliation agreement
`
`acceptable to the Commission.
`
`12.
`
`On April 6, 2021, the Commission issued to HHS Notices of Conciliation Failure
`
`advising HHSthat the Commission was unable to secure from HHSa conciliation agreement
`
`acceptable to the Commission.
`
`13.
`
`All conditions precedentto the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 4 of 18 PagelD #: 5
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`14.
`
`HHS wasfounded in 1975 and began as housekeeping support to the health care
`
`industry. HHS now providesa variety of support services to hospitals as well as to otherfacilities
`
`throughout the United States, including, but not limited to Arkansas, Tennessee and Mississippi.
`
`The job descriptions for housekeeper and floor technician are the same.
`
`15.
`
`On or about 2015, HHS began requiring its employees to take an Essential
`
`Functions Test (EFT), a qualification standard. Prior to the EFT, HHS used a physical screening
`
`test.
`
`16.
`
`The elements of the EFT allegedly measure the employees’ strength, flexibility,
`
`dexterity, ability to lift, balance, and mobility as demonstrated by different activities/exercises.
`
`17.|HHSrequires employees to take and pass the EFT at hire, upon return from a
`
`medical leave of absence, annually, and after a workplace injury.
`
`18.|Examples on the test include having the ability to bend and touch toes 10 times;
`
`hold 20 poundsat arms length from the body for ten seconds; lunging backward and lowering the
`
`back knee to the floor repeating with each leg; squatting by completing five knee bends/squats;
`
`standing on one foot for ten seconds; ability to pick up items and squatfive times; and kneel on
`
`one knee five times with each leg.
`
`19.|HHSterminates employees who donotpassall portions of the EFT.
`
`20.|HHSterminates employees who do notpassall portions of the EFT even if the
`
`employees can perform the essential functions of the job and were performing the essential
`
`functions ofthe job prior to the EFT.
`
`21.
`
`The EFT unlawfully screens out or tends to screen out an individual with a
`
`disability and a class of individuals with disabilities.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 5 of 18 PagelD #: 6
`
`22.|HHSunlawfully used the EFT as a qualification standard to screen out individuals
`
`with disabilities.
`
`23.|HHSdid not validate its EFT as required by the ADA.
`
`24.|HHS’s EFTis not job-related and consistent with a business necessity as required
`
`by the ADA.
`
`STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
`
`25.
`
`Since at least January 2015, HHS engaged in unlawful employmentpractices at
`
`Sparks Hospital in Fort Smith, Arkansas, and at other hospitals throughout the United States in
`
`violation of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112.
`
`26.
`
`The unlawful employmentpractices include using a qualification standard, the
`
`EFT,that screens out or tends to screen out individuals with disabilities who take HHS’s EFT
`
`and whofail certain sections of HHS’s EFT because oftheir disabilities and then terminating
`
`those employees whofailed the EFT.
`
`CHARGING PARTY RODNEY ROBERTS
`
`27.|HHShired Roberts as a floor technician at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth,
`
`Texas, around January 1, 2014.
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`Roberts had worked as a floor technician at the hospital since around April 2012.
`
`Roberts has diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, osteoarthritis, and plantar fibromas.
`
`Roberts has disabilities which substantially limited, at a minimum, his endocrine
`
`function and ability to stand and walk.
`
`Roberts satisfactorily performed the essential functions of his floor technician
`
`position when he worked for HHS.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 6 of 18 PagelD #: 7
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`Around April 2015, HHS informed Roberts he would need to undergo an EFT to
`
`continue his employment.
`
`Roberts was a qualified individual with a disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)
`
`and 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).
`
`g.
`
`In June 2015, Roberts provided HHSa statement from his physician explaining that
`
`his medical conditions, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, osteoarthritis, and plantar
`
`fibromas would impacthis ability to pass the EFT.
`
`h.
`
`HHStold Roberts on or about July 31, 2015, ifhe did not take the EFT, HHS would
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`discharge him.
`
`HHSdischarged Roberts on or about July 31, 2015.
`
`HHSdischarged Roberts because of his disabilities and due to his refusal to take
`
`the EFT.
`
`k.
`
`HHSdid not discharge Roberts because of any issues in performing the floor
`
`technician job.
`
`1.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen Roberts out because ofhis
`
`disabilities and subjected Roberts to an adverse employment action, termination.
`
`m.
`
`HHSneverdetermined at the timeit discharged Roberts that he posed a direct threat
`
`to the health or safety of himself or to other individuals in the workplace.
`
`CHARGING PARTY VERNESTINE GIBBS
`
`28.|HHS hired Gibbs as a housekeeper at Southeastern Hospital in Kingsland, Georgia,
`
`around November2014.
`
`a.
`
`Gibbshas arthritis, chronic pain syndrome, and fibromyalgia.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 7 of 18 PagelD #: 8
`
`Gibbs’ disabilities substantially limit, at a minimum, the majorlife activities of
`
`walking, standing, and sleeping.
`
`Gibbs satisfactorily performed the essential functions of her housekeeping job
`
`while employed by HHS.
`
`Gibbsis a qualified individual with a disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) and 42
`
`U.S.C. § 12111(8).
`
`Around May23, 2016, HHSrequired Gibbsto take and pass the EFT.
`
`Gibbsfailed the EFT dueto her disabilities.
`
`HHSdischarged Gibbsdueto her disabilities and her inability to pass the EFT and
`
`not because of any performanceissues with the housekeeping position.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen Gibbs out because of her
`
`disabilities and subjected Gibbs to an adverse employmentaction, termination.
`
`HHSneverdetermined at the time it discharged Gibbs that she posed a direct threat
`
`to the health or safety of herself or to other individuals in the workplace.
`
`CHARGING PARTY GEORGE RODRIGUEZ
`
`29.
`
`HHShired Rodriguez as a floor technician at Christus Santa Rosa Hospital in San
`
`Antonio, Texas, around October 21, 2013.
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`When hired, HHS administered a physical screening checklist to Rodriguez.
`
`The physical screening required Rodriguez to perform ninelifting and push and
`
`pull tests.
`
`Rodriguez successfully performed the ninelifting and push andpull portionsofthe
`
`physical screening.
`
`Rodriguez had diabetes, hypertension, and a previous knee surgery.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 8 of 18 PagelD #: 9
`
`é.
`
`f.
`
`Rodriquez’s disabilities, at a minimum, substantially limited the major life
`
`activities of his endocrine function, walking, standing, bending, and eating.
`
`Rodriguez satisfactorily performed the essential functions of his floor technician
`
`position.
`
`g.
`
`Rodriguez was a qualified individual with a disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)
`
`and 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).
`
`h.
`
`Around June 28, 2016, HHS informed Rodriguez that it required all employees to
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`I.
`
`take and pass the EFT annually.
`
`Rodriguez took the EFT and failed due to his disabilities.
`
`HHSdid not discharge Rodriguez becauseofissues relating to his ability to do the
`
`essential job functions of the floor technician position.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen out Rodriguez becauseofhis
`
`disabilities and subjected Rodriguez to an adverse employmentaction, termination.
`
`HHSneverdetermined at the time it discharged Rodriguez that he posed a direct
`
`threat to the health or safety of himself or to other individuals in the workplace.
`
`CHARGING PARTY KATHRYN GILL
`
`30.|HHShired Gill as a housekeeperin the emergency room at Lake Norman Hospital
`
`in Mooresville, North Carolina, around September 2012.
`
`a.
`
`Whenhired, Gill was legally blind as she lacked any peripheral vision, a condition
`
`since the age of twoorthree.
`
`b.
`
`Uponherhire, Gill completed a medical history questionnaire where she checked
`
`she had vision andarthritis issues.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document 2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 9 of 18 PagelD #: 10
`
`Gill has disabilities which substantially limit, at a minimum, her major life
`
`activities of seeing, walking, standing, bending, and reaching.
`
`Gill satisfactorily performed the essential functions of her housekeeping job while
`
`employed by HHS.
`
`Gill is a qualified individual with a disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) and 42
`
`USS.C. § 12111(8).
`
`HHSneverrequired that Gill take the EFT until Gill suffered an on-the-job injury
`
`around November11, 2017.
`
`Around November14, 2017, HHS required that Gill take the EFT.
`
`Gill failed the EFT.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen out Gill because of her
`
`disabilities and subjected Gibbs to an adverse employmentaction, termination.
`
`HHSneverdeterminedat the time it discharged Gill that she posed a direct threat
`
`to the health or safety of herself or to other individuals in the workplace.
`
`CHARGING PARTY DEBRA PARRY
`
`31.
`
`HHShired Debra Parry as assistant director at the University of Colorado Hospital
`
`in Denver, Colorado, around April 20, 2019.
`
`a.
`
`Upon her hire Parry completed a medical history questionnaire where she listed
`
`that she had a total knee replacement on May1, 2016.
`
`Following her surgery, Parry has a medical condition that constitutes a disability.
`
`Parry’s disability substantially limits, at a minimum, the majorlife activities of
`
`walking, standing, performing manualtasks, and bending.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 10 of 18 PagelD #: 11
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j-
`
`k.
`
`I.
`
`Parry was satisfactorily performing the essential job functions of the assistant
`
`director position.
`
`Parry was a qualified individual with a disability under 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) and
`
`42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).
`
`Around May 12, 2019, Parry traveled to Houston, Texas fortraining.
`
`On about May 14, 2019, HHS informed Parry she had to take the EFT.
`
`HHSadministered the EFT to Parry.
`
`Parry failed the EFT because she could not kneel.
`
`The vice president told Parry that he would not make exceptions for Parry’s
`
`disability.
`
`Thevice president told Parry that she was a liability and could not work for HHS
`
`with herdisability.
`
`Although Parry’s assistant director position lacked any physical demands, HHS
`
`required that Parry demonstrate that she could perform the duties of the
`
`housekeeping position.
`
`m.
`
`HHSdid not discharge Parry because of any performance issuesrelating to the
`
`assistant director position.
`
`n.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen out Parry because of her
`
`disability, and subjected Parry to an adverse employmentaction, termination.
`
`0.
`
`HHSnever determined at the time it discharged Parry that she posed a direct threat
`
`to the health or safety of herself or to other individuals in the workplace.
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 11 of 18 PagelD #: 12
`
`32.|HHSsubjected a class of other individuals with disabilities, the Claimants, to
`
`CLASS MEMBERS’ CLAIMS WITH DISABILITIES
`
`termination after they failed the EFT.
`
`a.
`
`These individuals included, amongst others, Levina Harris, Mary Williams, and
`
`RaymondLicea.
`
`b.
`
`Thesedisabilities included rheumatoidarthritis, lupus, hypertension, diabetes, and
`
`a lifting restriction.
`
`c.
`
`The Claimants were, at a minimum,substantially limited in the endocrine function
`
`and the majorlife activities of standing, walking, bending,lifting, and eating.
`
`d.
`
`These individuals,
`
`like Charging Parties Vernestine Gibbs, Rodney Roberts,
`
`George Rodriguez, Kathryn Gill, and Debra Parry, were satisfactorily performing
`
`the essential job functions of their housekeeping, floor technician, and dietary
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`positions without incident orissue.
`
`HHSrequired that the Claimants take the EFT.
`
`The Claimants were qualified individuals with a disability under 42 U.S.C. §§
`
`12102(2) and 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).
`
`The Claimants could not pass the EFT because of their physical impairments
`
`associated with their disabilities.
`
`Although the Claimants performed the essential functions of their jobs,
`
`the
`
`Claimants were unable to pass certain sections of the EFT, and HHSterminated
`
`their employment.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 12 of 18 PagelD #: 13
`
`i.
`
`HHSused a qualification standard, the EFT, to screen out the Claimants because
`
`of their disabilities and subjected them to an adverse employment action,
`
`termination.
`
`j.
`
`HHSnever determinedat the time it discharged the Claimants that the Claimants
`
`posed a direct threat to the health or safety of themselves or to other individuals in
`
`the workplace.
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`USING A DISCRIMINATORY QUALIFICATION STANDARD
`
`33.
`
`The Commission restates and incorporates by reference all
`
`the foregoing
`
`paragraphs.
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`Since at least January 2015, HHS used a qualification standard, an EFT, that
`
`screened out or tended to screen out individuals with disabilities.
`
`HHSrequiresthat all housekeeping, dietary, and floor technicians take the EFT.
`
`HHSrequires all employees, including employees with disabilities, to pass all
`
`portions of the EFT.
`
`d.
`
`HHSdoesnot make exceptions for employees whoare satisfactorily performing all
`
`the essential job functionsof the position.
`
`e.
`
`HHSapplied and used the EFT as qualification standards that screen out or tend to
`
`screen out
`
`individuals with disabilities, and the EFT is not job-related and
`
`consistent with business necessity in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) and (b)(6).
`
`f.
`
`The policies and practices complained of in the preceding paragraphs deprive
`
`Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George Rodriquez, Kathryn
`
`Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary Williams, Raymond
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2_
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 13 of 18 PagelD #: 14
`
`Licea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals of equal employment
`
`opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of
`
`their disabilities.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`The unlawful employment practices complained of in the foregoing paragraphs
`
`above were intentional.
`
`The unlawful employment practices complained of in the foregoing paragraphs
`
`above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally
`
`protected rights of Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George
`
`Rodriquez, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary
`
`Williams, Raymond Licea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals.
`
`i.
`
`The unlawful employmentpractices complained ofin the foregoing paragraphsare
`
`continuous and ongoing.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`DISCHARGE
`
`34.
`
`The Commission restates and incorporates by reference all
`
`the foregoing
`
`paragraphs.
`
`a.
`
`Since at least January 2015, HHS has violated the ADAby terminating employees
`
`with disabilities who failed to pass the EFT because oftheir disabilities, 42 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 12112(a) and (b)(6).
`
`b.
`
`Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George Rodriquez, Kathryn
`
`Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary Williams, Raymond
`
`Licea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals are qualified individuals
`
`with disabilities.
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 14 of 18 PagelD #: 15
`
`c.
`
`HHS discharged Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George
`
`Rodriquez, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary
`
`Williams, and Raymond Licea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals
`
`because oftheir disabilities.
`
`d.
`
`HHSdischarged Roberts after he presented a note from his doctor seeking to
`
`exclude him from the EFT becausehis disabilities, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy,
`
`osteoarthritis and plantar fibromas, would impact his ability to pass certain portions
`
`of the EFT.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`Although Roberts performed the essential functions of the floor technician job,
`
`HHSdischarged Roberts dueto his inability to take and pass the EFT.
`
`Although Gibbs performed the essential functions of the housekeeping job, HHS
`
`discharged Gibbs after she failed to pass all portions of the EFT because of her
`
`disabilities.
`
`g.
`
`Although Rodriguez performed the essential functions of the floor technician job,
`
`HHSdischarged Rodriguez becauseofhis inability to pass all portions ofthe EFT.
`
`h.
`
`Although Gill performed the essential functions of the housekeeping job, HHS
`
`discharged Gill because she could not pass all portions of the EFT.
`
`i.
`
`J
`
`HHStold Parry that it could not make exceptions for her disability, she was a
`
`liability to HHS, and she could not work for HHS with her disability.
`
`Although Parry could perform the essential functions of her position, HHS
`
`discharged Parry because she could notpassall portions ofthe EFT.
`
`k.
`
`Although Harris performed the essential functions of the housekeeping position,
`
`HHSdischarged Harris because she could notpassall portions of the EFT.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 15 of 18 PagelD #: 16
`
`L
`
`Although Williams performedthe essential functions ofthe housekeeping position,
`
`HHSdischarged Williams because she could notpassall portions ofthe EFT.
`
`m.
`
`Although Licea performed the essential functions of the floor technician position,
`
`HHSdischarged Licea because he could notpass all portions ofthe EFT.
`
`n.
`
`HHSdischarged Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George
`
`Rodriquez, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary
`
`Williams, RaymondLicea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals who
`
`failed the EFT, but who successfully performed the essential functions of their
`
`position.
`
`0.
`
`When HHSdischarged Charging Parties Rodney Robert, Vernestine Gibbs, George
`
`Rodriquez, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary
`
`Williams, RaymondLicea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals, HHS
`
`never conducted an individualized assessment to determine whether they posed a
`
`direct threat to the health or safety ofthemselves or others in the workplace.
`
`p.
`
`The unlawful employment practices complained of in the foregoing paragraphs
`
`above were intentional.
`
`q.
`
`The unlawful employment practices complained of in the foregoing paragraphs
`
`above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally
`
`protected rights of Charging Parties Rodney Roberts, Vernestine Gibbs, George
`
`Rodriquez, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, and Class members Levina Harris, Mary
`
`Williams, Raymond Licea, and other similarly situated aggrieved individuals.
`
`r.
`
`The unlawful employmentpractices complained ofin the foregoing paragraphsare
`
`continuous and ongoing.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2_
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 16 of 18 PagelD #: 17
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
`
`A.
`
`Grant a permanent
`
`injunction enjoining HHS,
`
`its officers, agents, servants,
`
`employees, attorneys, andall persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging
`
`in any employmentpractice which discriminates based on disability
`
`B.
`
`Order HHSto institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which
`
`provide equal employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities or who are regarded as
`
`having disabilities and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment
`
`practices.
`
`C.
`
`Order HHS to cease using qualification standards such as the EFT, other
`
`employmenttests, or other selection criteria that screensoutor tends to screen outindividuals with
`
`disabilities.
`
`D.
`
`Order HHSto discontinue its practice of discharging employees with disabilities
`
`for failure to pass the EFT.
`
`E.
`
`Grant a permanent
`
`injunction enjoining HHS,
`
`its officers, agents, servants,
`
`employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them,
`
`from
`
`discriminating against individuals with disabilities.
`
`F.
`
`Grant a permanent
`
`injunction enjoining HHS,
`
`its officers, agents, servants,
`
`employees, attorneys, andall persons in active concert or participation with them, from interfering
`
`with any individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on accountof his or her having exercised
`
`or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other individual in the
`
`exercise or enjoymentof any right protected by the ADA.
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2_
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 17 of 18 PagelD #: 18
`
`G.
`
`Grant ajudgmentrequiring HHSto pay appropriate back wages in an amount to be
`
`determined at trial and prejudgmentinterest to individuals whose wages are being unlawfully
`
`withheldas a result of the acts complained of above.
`
`H.
`
`Order HHSto make wholeall individuals adversely affected by the unlawful
`
`practices described above, by providing the affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of
`
`its unlawful practices, including but notlimited to instatement, reinstatement, provide front pay in
`
`lieu of reinstatement, or otherwise make whole individuals denied employment becauseof their
`
`disabilities.
`
`1.
`
`Order HHS to make whole Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez, Vernestine
`
`Gibbs, Kathryn Gill, Debra Parry, Levina Harris, Mary Williams, RaymondLicea, andall
`
`similarly situated individuals by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses
`
`resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above, including emotionalpain,suffering,
`
`loss of enjoymentoflife, and humiliation, in amounts to be determinedattrial.
`
`J.
`
`Order HHSto pay Rodney Roberts, George Rodriquez,Vernestine Gibbs, Kathryn
`
`Gill, Debra Parry, Levina Harris, Mary Williams, Raymond Licea, and all similarly situated
`
`individuals, punitive damagesfor its malicious and reckless conduct described above in amounts
`
`to be determined at trial.
`
`K.
`
`Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public
`
`interest.
`
`L.
`
`Award the Commissionits costs of this action.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMAND
`
`The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint.
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-02134-PKH Document2
`
`Filed 08/24/21 Page 18 of 18 PagelD #: 19
`
`GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS
`Acting General Counsel
`
`/s/Faye A. Williams
`FAYE A. WILLIAMS
`Regional Attorney
`TN Bar No. 11730
`
`/s/Amy F. Black
`AmyF.Black
`Supervisory Trial Attorney
`TN Bar No. 016102
`
`_
`
`/s/ Michelle B. Sisco
`Michelle B. Sisco
`Trial Attorney
`TN Bar No. 035682
`
`EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
`COMMISSION
`1407 Union Avenue, Suite 900
`Memphis, TN 38104
`Telephone (901) 685-4609
`Telephone (901) 685-4606
`Telephone (901) 701-6447
`faye.williams@eeoc.gov
`amy.black@eeoc.gov
`michelle.siscoMeeoc.gov
`
`/s/ Pamela B, Dixon
`PAMELA DIXON
`Senior Trial Attorney
`AR Bar No. 95085
`
`EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
`COMMISSION
`820 LouisianaSt., Suite 200
`Little Rock, AR 72201
`Telephone (501) 900-6145
`pamela.dixon@eeoc.gov
`
`18
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
