Plaintiff Rosalind Clayton sued defendants United States Postal Service and American Postal Workers Union in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, raising claims of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and other violations under various federal statutes. Defendants United States Postal Service and American Postal Workers Union moved to dismiss Clayton’s claims under Rule 12(b).
Factual Overview
Rosalind Clayton, a self-represented 60-year-old Black Christian woman, works for the United States Postal Service and is a member of the American Postal Workers Union. In 2022 and 2023, Clayton experienced several disagreements with coworkers, supervisors, and union representatives, which resulted in her filing both Equal Employment Opportunity complaints and union grievances. These disputes included verbal altercations with coworkers, schedule changes, and a suspension following an incident with a coworker. Clayton also alleged that the union failed to properly handle her grievances and settled grievances without her consent.
On September 20, 2023, Clayton filed a 14-count complaint against the Postal Service and the union, citing various federal statutes, including Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the Equal Pay Act, and others. Clayton sought damages for unpaid wages, emotional distress, and other losses, totaling approximately $17.6 million.
Legal Analysis
Postal Service’s Motion to Dismiss: The court found that Clayton failed to properly serve the Postal Service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 but declined to dismiss the complaint on this basis. Instead, the court provided Clayton another chance to properly serve the Postal Service by June 14, 2024. The court denied the Postal Service’s motions to dismiss on the remaining grounds as moot.
Union’s Motion to Dismiss
Discrimination Claims: The court agreed with the union that Clayton failed to allege facts demonstrating discrimination, as her allegations amounted to conclusory statements. The court dismissed Clayton’s discrimination claims against the union.
Implied-Duty-of-Fair-Representation Claims: The court construed Clayton’s allegations that the union failed to effectively represent her as implied-duty-of-fair-representation claims. The court found that Clayton’s claim relating to the union’s January 2023 settlement was time-barred under the applicable six-month statute of limitations. However, the court allowed Clayton’s claims relating to the union’s August 2023 settlements to proceed.
The court ordered Clayton to properly serve the Postal Service by June 14, 2024, and dismissed the Postal Service’s motions to dismiss as moot. The court granted the union’s motions to dismiss the discrimination claims and partially dismissed the implied-duty-of-fair-representation claims. Finally, the court denied Clayton’s various motions as moot.
Schrag on Law 