Plaintiff Patricia Williams sued defendant Fort Zumwalt School District in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri raising claims of race discrimination, religious discrimination, disability discrimination, retaliation, harassment, failure to promote, failure to accommodate her disability, workers’ compensation retaliation, and termination of her employment under Title VII, the ADEA, the ADA, the Rehab Act, and ERISA. The Court, on its own initiative, reviewed Plaintiff’s amended complaint for frivolousness, maliciousness, and failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Factual Overview
Patricia Williams, a former bus driver for Fort Zumwalt School District, alleges that she was treated unfavorably after returning to work with restrictions following a workers’ compensation claim. She claims that she was written up for attendance on days she was not there and for parking closer to the trailer to clock in on time due to her hip and back pain related to her job injury. Additionally, Williams asserts that five employees submitted complaints about her to her bosses when she returned to regular duty. She also alleges that a student air-dropped photos to her personal cellphone on February 8, 2022, and that during her termination meeting, her supervisor complained about her contacting him on his cellphone regarding personal issues with other employees.
Legal Analysis
Failure to Provide Charges of Discrimination: The Court notes that Williams failed to provide copies of her Charges of Discrimination filed with the EEOC and MCHR, as previously ordered. The Court allows Williams an additional 21 days to provide these documents, failure of which will result in the dismissal of the lawsuit for non-compliance with a Court Order.
Deficiencies in Plaintiff’s Claims
The Court identifies several deficiencies in Williams’ amended complaint:
1. Race and Religious Discrimination: Williams has not identified her race or alleged that any employment action was taken against her due to her race. Similarly, she has not included facts regarding her religion or how the exercise of that religion was affected.
2. Disability Discrimination: Williams has not alleged that she suffers from a recognized disability or that any discriminatory action was taken due to her disability or because she asked for accommodations.
3. Age Discrimination: Williams has not alleged that any adverse employment action was taken against her because of her age.
4. Individual Liability: The Court reminds Williams that federal discrimination statutes only provide a remedy against an employer, not individual supervisors.
5. ERISA Claim: While Williams appears to bring an ERISA claim based on the defendant’s alleged violation of COBRA, she has failed to provide any facts related to this claim.
The Court allowed Williams to file a second amended complaint addressing these deficiencies within 21 days.
The Court concluded that Williams must file a second amended complaint addressing the identified deficiencies and provide copies of her Charges of Discrimination within 21 days, failure of which will result in the dismissal of the action without prejudice.
Schrag on Law 