Facts

Plaintiff Cinthya Lara worked as a Transportation Security Officer at the San Francisco International Airport from Oct. 21, 2010 through July 31, 2012. Her employer was Covenant Aviation Security LLC, the company that handles baggage and checkpoint security throughout the SFO Airport. Plaintiff worked screening checked luggage.

On July 17, 2012 at 6 a.m., Ralene Maldonado told plaintiff "she was not sure" her shoes were compliant. She eventually took a picture of plaintiff's shoes with her cell phone and sent the picture via text to the terminal manager, Anthony Nguyen.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff testified that she purchased a pair of black Sketchers Shape Ups on March 10, 2012 and wore them to work every day while at international and Terminal 1 until July 17, 2012, when Maldonado confronted her. Maldonado then reported plaintiff, who was later told to clock out or be subject to termination. Clocking out was an unexcused absence and would put her on the path of progressive discipline. Plaintiff was upset and on the verge of crying. Plaintiff contended that a video of the incident did not show how plaintiff gave back the phone, however, plaintiff testified that she did not intend to throw the phone at Maldonado, but rather that she quickly turned on her heels and walked away in tears. Plaintiff eventually spoke to HR, clocked out, put on her shoes, and clocked back in. Plaintiff reported back to Maldonado thereafter and worked until being put on leave on July 29, 2012.

Covenant employee Fred Baptista's job was to perform audits, including of uniform and shoe compliance, he noted on March 29, 2012, that plaintiff was in compliance with standard operating procedures. He further testified that baggage screener employees like plaintiff commonly wore the shoes. Baptista and other supervisors at Covenant testified about the different set of uniform standards for those that worked the checkpoint stations in the public eye as compared to screeners.

Justin Collins, a current Covenant employee, testified that Maldonado confronted him twice regarding shoe issues. However, instead of requiring clocking out, he was allowed to take paid time to retrieve a compliant pair of shoes from a parking lot. Another time, she just let him keep working with non-compliant shoes. Collins testified that Maldonado also did not speak to him in the manner she spoke to plaintiff. Other Covenant employees testified of the exact Sketchers shoes being worn by other supervisors and employees and they did not have to clock out or otherwise have the issue called out to management. Plaintiff testified that in mid-June 2012, Maldonado wore these same shoes in Terminal 1.

Plaintiff's other supervisors testified that they had no complaints regarding plaintiff's performance, uniform or footwear. Plaintiff, however, immediately began to experience problems with Maldonado. Plaintiff testified she felt harassed and micromanaged. Other employees noticed this level of scrutiny and testified that this treatment by Maldonado was unique to plaintiff. On July 9, 2012, and again on July 12, 2012, plaintiff made complaints to Covenant's Human Resources department about the unfair treatment she suffered at the hands of Maldonado. HR staffer Rosalie Aranda spoke with Maldonado's supervisor Gerry Sanchez about plaintiff's issues on July 12, 2012.

Covenant's Executive Committee terminated plaintiff on July 31, 2012 for insubordination towards management by not clocking out, and workplace violence. Plaintiff contended that the Covenant executive committee did not consider plaintiff's prior HR complaints or her claim of retaliation. The chief investigator, Perkins, testified that the July 17, 2012 incident was discrete and wholly unrelated.

Plaintiff claimed that Covenant and Maldonado retaliated against her for complaining to Human Resources about Maldonado's different, unfair, and unequal treatment of her. Plaintiff also claimed that Covenant failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment, Covenant wrongfully discriminated against her on the basis of gender or race, as a biased supervisor who set in motion a series of events, which lead to her termination.

Plaintiff relied upon jury instruction CACI #2511 re "cats paws."

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants asserted that plaintiff was terminated lawfully for violating multiple employment policies.

The shoes have a small "S" insignia on the side, and silver shoelace eyelets, therefore the shoes are not all black as required by Covenant and its contract with the Transportation Security Administration. Maldonado testified that she checks shoes, for everyone every single day and therefore plaintiff must have first worn them on July 17, 2012. The Chief of Covenant's Operations at SFO, Jeff Pugh, testified that the shoes were obviously non-compliant.

Maldonado and other defense witnesses testified that she is hard on everyone, equally, and simply has a "tedious" demeanor as a supervisor. Pugh testified that Maldonado needed to work on her tone and delivery style but otherwise he wished all his supervisors were like Maldonado.

Nguyen testified that plaintiff hung up on him after he told her the shoes were non-compliant and she had to clock out or be subject to termination. Plaintiff then dropped/tossed the phone on the desk, or threw the phone back at her supervisor, who was sitting at her desk working at a keyboard. There are two video clips of this interaction, from TSA video surveillance of the area. Defense witnesses testified that plaintiff threw the phone in an overhand manner at Maldonado.

Maldonado denied having direct knowledge of the complaints that plaintiff made to the HR dept. until Sanchez told her about them.

Damages

Plaintiff asserted $151,057 in past the future lost earnings and benefits. Plaintiff also asserted an unspecified amount for emotional suffering, shock, humiliation, and distress with losing her job and not being able to care for her two young children.

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $156,157.

Other Information

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment in January 2014, which was denied. FILING DATE: Feb. 13, 2013.

Deliberation

12 hours

Poll

12-0 (gender discrimination), 11-1 (race discrimination), 9-3 (retaliation), 9-3 (failure to protect from retaliation)

Length

nine days