Fatmata Sesay (Osias) v. Santa Clara County Valley Medical Center, et al.
Published: Feb. 2, 2018 | Result Date: Jan. 8, 2018 |Case number: 5:16-cv-03761-EJD Summary Judgment – Defense
Judge
Court
USDC Northern District of California
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
George A. Brandt
(Office of the Santa Clara County Counsel)
for County of Santa Clara
Facts
Plaintiff Fatma Sesay worked for the County of Santa Clara as an Extra Help Nursing Attendant at a medical center. Extra help nursing attendants are not guaranteed set hours and there is a cap on the number of hours they may work per year without additional approval by the county. Plaintiff attended a meeting of union members. At that meeting, plaintiff signed a petition that was being passed around in connection with a nurse manager that worked with plaintiff. Some time later, plaintiff applied, but was not hired, for a permanent position posted by the center. Plaintiff filed charges with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but did not act further on those charges. Eventually, plaintiff was released from her job as an extra help nursing attendant. Plaintiff then again filed charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended retaliation and gender discrimination occurred in violation of the Civil Rights Act. Plaintiff asserted that, after she signed the petition at the union meeting regarding the nurse manager, plaintiff was treated differently at her job. Plaintiff claimed she was retaliated against for filing charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants moved for summary judgment on plaintiff's claims. Nurses who worked with plaintiff declared that she was not hired for a permanent position due to her tardiness, attitude, and dress code violations. Defendant claimed plaintiff's answers to interview questions for the permanent job were inadequate compared to other job candidates. Defendants contended that the retaliation claim should be barred for failure to exhaust, and further, that evidence refuted plaintiff's retaliation claims. Defendants argued the gender discrimination claim was untimely.
Damages
Plaintiff sought pay she argued she lost as a result of not being hired permanently.
Result
Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390