`
`AMY FITZGERALD,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TYSON FOODS, INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` §
`§
` §
` §
` §
`§
` §
`§
` §
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO.
`
`________________
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`DALLAS DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
`
`The plaintiff, Amy Fitzgerald, (“Plaintiff” or “Fitzgerald”), complains of Tyson Foods, Inc.
`
`(“Defendant” or “Tyson Foods”), as follows:
`
`VENUE AND JURISDICTION
`
`1. Fitzgerald is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Texas.
`
`2. Fitzgerald was a Regional Sales Manager for Tyson Foods and venue is proper because she
`
`has been subjected to unlawful employment practices committed in the State of Texas,
`
`Northern District, Dallas Division.
`
`3. Tyson Foods is primarily involved in the business of processing and marketing chicken,
`
`beef, and pork.
`
`4. Tyson Foods is a Delaware corporation, conducting business in Texas at 4114 Mint Way,
`
`Dallas, Texas, in the Northern District, and elsewhere, and this action accrued in whole or
`
`in part in the Northern District.
`
`5. Tyson Foods may be served with process by serving its registered agent in Texas: CT
`
`Corporation System, 1995 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 8 PageID 2Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 8 PageID 2
`
`6. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, 28 U.S.C. §1343(a)(4),
`
`and 28 U.S.C. §1337. The complaint seeks declaratory relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`2201, 2202. This suit is authorized and instituted pursuant to the Age Discrimination in
`
`Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §621, et seq.
`
`7. This is a proceeding for compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive and other legal
`
`and equitable available to secure the rights of Fitzgerald under the ADEA. It is brought to
`
`prevent Tyson Foods from maintaining policies, practices, customs or usages of
`
`discriminating against Fitzgerald in regard to terms, conditions, and privileges of
`
`employment in violation of these statutes.
`
`8. This matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the minimum
`
`jurisdictional limits of this Court.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`9. Amy Fitzgerald is a female and currently age fifty.
`
`10. Fitzgerald first became employed by Advance Food Company as an Operator Specialist in
`
`September 1994, a predecessor company of Tyson Foods. Advance Food Company merged
`
`with Pierre Foods in approximately 2010 and it became AdvancePierre Foods. In 2017,
`
`AdvancePierre Foods was acquired by Tyson Foods.
`
`11. Fitzgerald was promoted to Regional Sales Manager in 1995, and to Brand Manager in
`
`1996. In 2000, due to restructuring Fitzgerald returned to her position as Regional Sales
`
`Manager. Fitzgerald held the title of Regional Sales Manager when the company was
`
`acquired by Tyson Foods in 2017. Fitzgerald performed her job successfully, regularly
`
`receiving meets or exceeds performance review ratings throughout her employment until
`
`the review she received in October 2019.
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 3 of 8 PageID 3Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 3 of 8 PageID 3
`
`12. Fitzgerald worked remotely for Tyson from her home office in Dallas, Texas. On
`
`approximately October 1, 2018, Tyson did some restructuring and Fitzgerald began
`
`reporting to Jed Wells (“Wells”), Director of Sales, approximate age 47. Wells reports to
`
`Bill Shearin (“Shearin”), Senior Director of Sales, Food Service.
`
`13. Fitzgerald worked in the SW division, consisting of Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
`
`Arizona, and Las Vegas. As Regional Sales Manager, Fitzgerald was responsible for
`
`calling on distributors and operators in the North Texas region, which includes West Texas.
`
`There were six total Regional Sales Managers in the SW division. Additionally, there were
`
`three salespersons that handled operator accounts.
`
`14. In March 2019, Fitzgerald received a mid-year review from Wells that indicated she was
`
`meeting expectations. At times after Wells became her manager, Fitzgerald asked him to
`
`travel with her to visit clients relating to marketing programs or conversions, but he rarely
`
`went on client visits with her. During the time she reported to Wells, he went to only two
`
`or three meetings with her at BEK DFW only. He never went to any other distributor to
`
`make a call. He had lunch with Fitzgerald two times and went to a few other broker
`
`meetings at Waypoint in Dallas only. He never went to Lubbock or Amarillo despite
`
`Fitzgerald asking him for help in Amarillo. Throughout the time Fitzgerald worked with
`
`Wells, she received little support from him in performing her job duties.
`
`15. On October 17, 2019, Fitzgerald received her year-end performance review from Wells.
`
`For the first time in approximately 25 years of employment, Fitzgerald received an
`
`“inconsistent” performance rating on her annual performance review. In the review, Wells
`
`stated that Fitzgerald was distracted and spending too much time with her family.
`
`Fitzgerald was dumbfounded because she had no idea why he would make such statements.
`
`Wells had not previously told Fitzgerald that he thought her job performance was
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 4 of 8 PageID 4Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 4 of 8 PageID 4
`
`inadequate. Wells requested that she sign the review and return it by the next day. The next
`
`day Fitzgerald texted Wells and said she did not agree with the performance review, but
`
`she indicated that she would sign it and return it due to his request that she do so.
`
`16. Before the 2019 performance review, Wells had never discussed with Fitzgerald any
`
`perception that she was distracted due to family issues. Fitzgerald had taken two separate
`
`Fridays off to visit colleges with her daughter, but she used accrued paid time off.
`
`17. In 2019, Tyson did a SAP transition that joined Tyson, Sara Lee and AdvancePierre into
`
`one system. This transition caused massive chaos for six months to a year because
`
`employees often could not see inventory levels or get trucks to get orders to customers.
`
`Additionally, sometimes it appeared there was product in the freezer but there would not
`
`be any there. Fitzgerald believes that none of the salespersons in her division made their
`
`quotas in 2019 and 2020 because there were major shortages to customers.
`
`18. On October 31, 2019, Wells held a mandatory conference call for the Southwest Division.
`
`On that call, without any warning ahead of time, Wells took away eighty percent of
`
`Fitzgerald’s accounts and gave the largest of her accounts, BEK DFW, to Luis Fuerte,
`
`approximate age 40.
`
`19. Fitzgerald had spent over twenty years building the North Texas territory. After her
`
`termination, Fitzgerald learned that BEK DFW had repeatedly asked for her to be put back
`
`on the account after Wells had assigned it to Fuerte, but it was not returned to her.
`
`20. From October 2019 to February 2020, Fitzgerald repeatedly asked Wells for more
`
`operators as there was no way Fitzgerald could meet her sales goals with the distributions
`
`and operators that she had left. Wells did not provide Fitzgerald any operators despite her
`
`requests.
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 5 of 8 PageID 5Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 5 of 8 PageID 5
`
`21. In November 2019, Fitzgerald attended the national sales meeting. At that meeting they
`
`acknowledged employees who had reached milestone years at the company. Fitzgerald did
`
`not receive any acknowledgement despite having met the 25 year milestone of service.
`
`22. At the time Fitzgerald received her performance review, Wells had not told her how
`
`negatively it would affect her year-end bonus. In January or February 2020, due to the
`
`negative performance rating on her 2019 year-end review, Fitzgerald received a
`
`substantially lower bonus than her counterparts.
`
`23. On February 28, 2020, Wells placed Fitzgerald on a performance improvement plan
`
`(“PIP”). In the PIP, Fitzgerald was criticized for ineffective CRM usage. However, many
`
`salespersons at the company struggled with working with the CRM system. Indeed, at the
`
`national sales meeting, Fitzgerald became aware that some salespersons in other regions
`
`did not even know how to get into the CRM system.
`
`24. Fitzgerald was aware at the time she was put on a PIP that substantially younger and/or
`
`male counterparts who had difficulty making quota and who were not effectively using the
`
`CRM tool, were not counseled or disciplined. On March 14, 2020, all salespersons at Tyson
`
`Foods were grounded from travel, and as a result Fitzgerald’s PIP was suspended because
`
`of the inability to call on clients.
`
`25. At the end of June 2020, Luis Fuerte, who had been given Fitzgerald’s largest account
`
`when Wells took most of her accounts away, resigned from Tyson Foods. After he resigned,
`
`Wells divided the accounts that Fuerte had, giving the BEK account to Corr and all the
`
`operators to Keaton Hicks, approximate age late 20s, a salesperson who sold to operators
`
`in the Dallas area. Fitzgerald questioned Wells about why she was not getting any of the
`
`accounts and he said it was because all of the accounts could be called on from home due
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 6 of 8 PageID 6Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 6 of 8 PageID 6
`
`to Covid-19. After this call, Wells redid Fitzgerald’s PIP so she could do it out of her office
`
`during Covid-19.
`
`26. Wells provided the new version of the PIP to Fitzgerald on June 26, 2020, with an ending
`
`date of July 24, 2020. After Wells reinstituted the PIP, Fitzgerald contacted Director of
`
`Human Resources Locken, to complain about the PIP and about the discriminatory and
`
`retaliatory way Wells was behaving in the PIP meetings.
`
`27. On July 30, 2020, Wells terminated Fitzgerald’s employment. Wells told her that she had
`
`improved but was being terminated for failing to successfully complete the PIP in the
`
`timeframe allotted.
`
`ADEA
`
`28. Fitzgerald incorporates by reference paragraphs 9 to 27 herein.
`
`29. Fitzgerald was born April 28, 1970 and is currently age 50. Fitzgerald is a member of the
`
`protected age group within the meaning of the ADEA.
`
`30. At all times material to this action, Tyson Foods employed at least twenty employees and
`
`is an employer with the meaning of the ADEA.
`
`31. A.Tyson Foods employs more than 100 employees;
` B. Tyson Foods employs more than 200 employees;
` C. Tyson Foods employs more than 500 employees.
`
`32. All conditions precedent to the filing of this suit have been met:
`
`
`
`A. On or around September 22, 2020, Fitzgerald filed a charge of discrimination with the
`Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and Texas Workforce
`Commission (“TWC”), alleging age, sex and retaliation discrimination;
`B. More than 60 days have passed since the date the charge was filed.
`
`37. Fitzgerald alleges that Tyson Foods, in a continuing course of conduct, discriminated
`
`against her in the terms, conditions and privileges of employment because of her age, and
`
`specifically in subjecting Fitzgerald to less favorable working conditions than those to
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 7 of 8 PageID 7Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 7 of 8 PageID 7
`
`which younger employees were subjected, including in failing to apply employee rules
`
`and/or performance standards equally and in terminating her employment.
`
`38. Fitzgerald alleges that Tyson Food’s age discrimination conduct is willful under the
`
`ADEA.
`
`39. Fitzgerald has no plain or adequate remedy at law to correct the wrongs complained of
`
`herein, and has thus instituted this suit for damages, declaratory relief and injunctive relief
`
`provided for under the ADEA. Further, Fitzgerald is now suffering and will continue to
`
`suffer irreparable injury from Tyson Food’s policies, practices, customs, and usages, set
`
`forth herein.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
` 39. Fitzgerald requests that this Court grant her the following relief from Tyson Foods:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A. A declaratory judgment against Tyson Foods, declaring its past practices herein
`complained of to be unlawful under the ADEA;
`
`B. A permanent injunction, enjoining Tyson Foods from continuing to discriminate
`against her on account of age, in violation of the ADEA;
`
`C. Backpay, front pay, retroactive seniority, pension benefits, bonus payments, health
`benefits, and any other relief necessary to compensate Fitzgerald for damages for
`ADEA;
`
`D. Liquidated damages for Tyson Food’s willful violation of the ADEA;
`
`E. Implementation of a clear and effective grievance procedure for employment
`discrimination complaints with an effective non-retaliation provision and
`advisement to all employees over the age of 40 of Tyson Foods of such grievance
`and non-retaliation provisions;
`
`F. Attorney fees from Tyson Foods for the prosecution of her ADEA claim;
`
`G. Costs for the prosecution of the ADEA claim, including the cost of expert witness
`fees;
`
`H. Pre-judgment interest at the legally prescribed rate from the date of the violations
`until judgment as well as post-judgment interest as applicable;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 8 of 8 PageID 8Case 3:21-cv-00331-B Document 1 Filed 02/16/21 Page 8 of 8 PageID 8
`
`
`
`
`
`I. Such other general relief to which Fitzgerald is justly entitled.
`
`
` 40. Fitzgerald demands a jury on all ADEA claims, specifically, the ultimate issues of fact as
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`to the merits of the dispute, backpay, frontpay, employee benefits, and compensatory and
`
`punitive damages, excepting the attorneys' fees issues.
`
`
`
`
` Respectfully Submitted,
`
`
`
`/s/ Jane Legler
`Jane Legler
`Texas Bar No. 03565820
`Christine Neill
`Texas Bar No. 00796793
` Kyla Gail Cole
` Texas Bar No. 24033113
`
` Neill Legler Cole PLLC
` 3141 Hood Street, Ste. 200
` (214) 748-7777
` (214) 748-7778 (facsimiles)
` christine@nlcemployeelaw.com
` jane@nlcemployeelaw.com
` kyla@nlcemployeelaw.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and Jury Demand – Page 8
`
`