Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu V New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Uploaded by

    opracrusades
    112 views21 pages
    Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu v New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Original Title

    Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu v New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu v New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    112 views21 pages

    Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu V New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Uploaded by

    opracrusades
    Caroline Rich, Marie Joe Farrior, Okey Sibedu v New Jersey Department of Children and Families

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 21
    Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 1 of 21 PagelD: 1 [UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAROLINE RICH, -MARIB-IOE FARRIOR, OKEY SIBEDU, Plain), cagainst- Civil Action No. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, [NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, MARY BROWNE, WAYNE SHREWING, AND. ILA BHATNAGAR, Dofendant() Plainifs, Caroline Rich, Maric-loe Parsioe and Okey Sibedu, by thet attomey Albert Van-Late,complat ing ofthe Defendants alleges follows: JURISDICITION AND VENUE |, Thisaction is authorized and instituted inthis court pursuant io esimed violation of| te 14th Amedtent to the Constitution ofthe United States and a violation of 42 USC 1981, 42 USC § 1983, 42 USC § 12101, Title VI ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 [USC § 20005), amongst others. Defends” repel business offices ar located in New Jesey. 3, Plaine are sesidents of New Jersey. 4 Venue isin this district pursuant to 28 USC § 1392. PARTIES 5. Plains aco employees of the Defendants 6 Plsnts Rich white female 7. Plains Metie-Joe Ferrior is an African Amesican female wit Haitian national origin. Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document Filed 04/02/14 Page 2 of 21 PagelD: 2 8 Plaintiff Okey Sod isan Atiean American male with Nigerian national origin, 9, Defendants were Plintis employer thoughout the relevant perio of his complain, 10, The Defendants have the power to grat the rele plaintiff are seking. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 11, Paints Sibedu and Farsior have fled complaints wit he Equa Bnployment Opportuity Commission (“EEOC RETALIATION ~ PLAINTIFF CAROLINE RICH 12, Plaintiff Rich was approached ino around ly 2013 by NJ Depaty Atiorney Genera Nicole Colon, who requested an interview with Plan Rich because she was named sa potentl witness fr the state in an employment discrimination case led in federal cnt, by Tracy Barco, her former supervisor, hatte Atomey General's fice was representing the state and preparing a defense. 13. Plaintiff Rich nally refused o volunteer information and stated to Ms. Colon that he would be a wits forthe plait, Tray Buco. 14, Upon further disostions Paint Rich began fo answer questions font MS, Calon Pini Rich informed Ms, Colon that sho believes Tracy Barco was a viet of ice iscrninaton and retaliation while she was employed at NJ. Dep. of Children and Families 15, Plant Rich ter informed Ms, Colon that she would be cooperating as witness ‘ith Tray Baro and her attoey’s investigations into the complaint. 16, Plan Rich alo informed Ms, Calon hat case supervisor, Wayne Shewing authorized the closure ofthe KN cat ad Pati Rich was present and isteed tothe conversation bebween Mr. Shewring and Ms. Bateo in which Ms, Bateo was instructed Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document Filed 040214 Page 3 of 21 PagelD: 3 to lose the KN case (an action tat resulted inthe disrtinatory termination of Tracy arco and spate punishment for Ms Bareo, Mr, Shewring, the White supervisor ‘io uorized the action was only given fve days suspension and not ermine or punished forte. 17, Plaintiff Rich described several aspects of mismanagement by case supervisor ‘Shevsing, nd managers ofthe Mercer South Local Office to Ms, Colon, ncuding violations of the modiiedsxtement agreement. 18, Shorly fer Rich's dsstoute fo Ma, Colo that she was going tobe a witness for Ms. ‘Barco, she began to receive disciplinary threats and dieiplinary writeups and acminstratve charges because she formed the Deputy Attorney General tat se was soing to cooperate 8a wits for Tracy Barco and was not going be witness for thestate 19, Ms. Coleman Kelly shortly afer the interview tld Plaintiff Rich that she should not become a witness in the ease because it wil get er into trouble with management snd 1a Bhataapt. Mary Browne the Mercer South Locel Office Manager alo fold li Rich not testify against management 20, Psi Rich od thers hat she cant teal alsely for management. 21, After her disclosures to Ms. Colon Plaintiff Rich began to get a barage of thre of discptnay actions fom Mr, Stewring, Mary Browne, and a Bhunagr. 22, Plant Rich's request for reassignment ecanseof hardship and disability was not onored and no step wat made proces the request 23, In September 2013, while Paint Rich was out sick on officiel ck lave Rich was compelled to attend a fitness for duty examination. Case 2:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 4 of 21 PagelD: 4 24, Atendance of itness fr duty examination by an employee on oficial sick leave isnot csomary as Plain Rich was nol yet ready ot requesting to come back, 25, This was a retaliatory attempt against by Ms. Bhatnagar, the Director of Employee Relations, whos io an aomey and was consulted by Tracy Barco, while she was in private practice in 2011, before she became the head of NI DCF Employee Relations. 26, Plintf’s name, along with thers was provided at tha ime to Ms. Bhatnagar by Tracy Bax. 27, Ms. Dhatuagar ad independent knowledge tht Plains wines for Tracy Barco and sho wed it gina Planif Rich ina rtalistory manner beceuse she knew Plintift ich ea witness for Ms Barco 28, OnSeptember 19,2013, PhintfT Rich attended a compulsory medical evaluation atthe request of Ms. Bhatnagar. 29, ‘Thedoctr asked that Plisif Rich be reovaeated in three months. 30, Ms. Bhatnagar, however, wrote Plitiff Rich etter on Oster 9, 2013 setting contions for Ric's retum prior tothe doctor examining Rich and issuing opinion, or seting conditions 31, Twoadditionsl medical tess evaluations were setup fr Pint in December 2013, ‘sn agin in Jamary 2014 22, eis unuoual for so many requests for model evaluation fo be made in a shot ime for a employee and Plinff Rich was shone for so many evaluation and ‘eevaluntons in order to punish her because she agreed tobe a witness for Tracy Barco. 33. Plaindff Rich continued to be bombarded by Ms. Bhatnagar with numerous directives 1 go for medical evaluation or be teminated, Case 3:14-«v-02075-JAP-DEA Document Filed 04/02/14 Page 5 of 21 PagelD: 5 34, ‘These ditetives are ongoing and stil continue to the present time 35. Plaintiff Rich was given a five day suspension after she refused to support the agency's ‘position because she did not want to support the flschood that she knows they put together a their defense against Plaintiff Barco, 36, Plain Rich received notice from Ms. Mekimns of Employee Relations thatthe ‘Attomey General will be interviewing her and Rich informed her that she does not want to bea witness forthe state as she eannot in good conscience provide evidence to suppor falsehood against Ms Bareo. 437, Subsequent to conveying the information tothe agency that Iam a witness for Ms. ‘Barco Plantff Rich was suspended as a pretext for an event that management alleged happened five months eats. 38, Mary Browne called Plaintiff Rich into hand her the suspension an told hes to seck ‘another job because was not cooperating wth the office and the agency inthe defense ofthe ease 39, Plait Rich was also pesistently told by her supervisor Jackie Coleman Kelly not t9 ‘bother becoming a witness for Ms. Barco. 40. When Plaintiff Rich insisted that she will provide testimony in suppot of Ms, Barco ‘Ms, Coleman Kelly told hor that she needed to find another job. These actions were all in retaliation for PlaintifT Rich supporting Ms, Barco. 41, Thetiming and nature ofthe adverse employment action of harassment ae presumptive evidence of Defendants’ discriminatory and retaliatory intent. 42. Te events that transpired indicate tht Defendants” actions were intended to punish Plaintiff for acting asa witness for Tracy Batco’s case. Case 3:14-0v-02075.JAP-DEA Document Filed 0402/14 Page 6 of 21 PagelD: 6 45. Defendants’ actions were retaliatory and based on animus towards Plaintiff for asserting his rights as afforded by, New Jersey and Federal Law. [REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION -PLAINTIFE RICH 44, Plain Rich's equests for reasonable aecommodation were ignore fo tong time 45, Praitff Rich complied with ageny's requirements for the request but no reasonable accomodation ws provided nowithandng he ft that the ageny could have decommodated et 46, Ms. Bhatnagn consis resured Maint Rih resign orto got these examinations when ober imal situated staff were not pressured nated mulplo erations when they ae on Fave, or quested torte or quit air obs 47. Plein Rit was aso punished with en (10) day pre eating suspension by Ms ‘Bhatnagar for expressing her opinion to he family members that she acompanied to cour while he was on sic leave. 48 Plant Rich discussed wi her fail the fact hatte agency may have violated thet sighs based on te arguments presented by the publi defender on their bel in cour, ‘andthe judge's rang in hee favor. 49. These actions by Ms. Bhatnagar were caleulated to punish Rich for operating nthe Barco investigation. 50, ‘The sgency aso istvted an investigation aginst her in January 2014, elaning ha a call vas rived shat her cild may have been abused or neglected. SL. ‘This war false allegation 52, The allegations were investigated and they were not substantiated, Case 3:44-0v-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 0402/14 Page 7 of 21 PagelD: 7 53, ‘Theagency however left the ease open and would not clas it notwithstanding the fact, thatthe case was not substantiated. ‘4, This investigation andthe refusal ofthe agency to clos it are that she is being targeted fr a punitive treatment because she cooperated in am BEO inestigtion and she is appearing asa witness fr the plant in the action RETALIATION - OKEY SIBEDU $5, Plant Sibedu was told “Browne stood in font of Barco's office door while she was speaking with workers in he office, and questioned Baro about whether or not she made contac with mein Nigeria yet. When Barco told Browne that she was not sucess, Browne yelled at Barco while rising her eyes, "That's it! Lam cling Del (Delphine McKinsis at Labor Relations. Iam going to fre Okey and he can jus fight for his job back. don’ believe he is sik in Aca with Malaria ashe is reporting. Whe thinks te is going o beable to use being out sik as serving his suspension he is no ‘He will begin serving hs suspesion without pay when he retums to work. You re ving him the benoit the doubt that hos realy sick. He does tis every year.” ‘Browne then stormed aay fiom Barc's offic.” 56, ‘The above behavior of Mary Browne demonstrates racial discrimination, hostile work environment, unf abor practice, and retaliation. 57, Shorty ater Mary skowne became the Local Oftce Manager of Mercer South, se ‘began having Plt Sibedu’s spervior Robyera Reva! (blac female) call iets snd ingite shout Pini Sided, 58, Plait Sib felt huniated when clients would contact him an inform him of ach inguires Ms, Revoal was making. Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/0214 Page 8 of 21 PagelD: 8 9. 61 a. 6s 66, “This ruined Pitt Sibedu's rpport with files and suggests lack of competency to the families he served Subsequent this wrongful termination on November 4, 2013 twas brought 19 ainsi Sibedu' atlenion tha! he now Diector of Labor Relations of Deparnent of Children and Fansites is he same person hat Ms. Batco considered retsning fr her ‘wronglterination lw suit Baro vs, Sat of New ery 2012 Ms la Bhstnagar, font Kline burge and Nasey La Fim in Haddonfield New Jersey, conslted with Ms. Barco ons css tha received media sttention which ltimaely rested inthe wrongfl rmination of Ms Barco and seve other nino. Furthemote, Ms. Bhatnagar ws provided a copy ofthe EEOC complaint filed by Ms. ‘Barco in 2011 that ited Plait bod asa witness ‘Ms. Bhathagar never recused here fom any direst or indtet involvement with Plain Sibods having knowledge there isa confit of interes ator present as Plaintiff Sibeda is witness in Labor Dispute. “More importantly, Ms. Bhatnagar misused er position, ber lawyer sil to itinidate Plant ibeda when she interrogated Plans Sibed sbout the alleged inaction he is scoued of lint Sie els Ms, Bhstagar tempted to slit information rom hm ina Teading manner. Ms, Bhatnagar’ failure to use fll disclosure that she was a lawyer to the plaintiff Ms arco prior to becoming the directo ofthe department of labor relations prevented Case 2:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document Filed 04/02/14 Page 9 of 21 PagelD: 9 Plain ibe fom his ight from having his own eel representation when he is «questioned by an attorney. 67. Ms, Bhatnagar has neve filed cert—eation disclosing her prior volvement with Mo ‘Baro and her awareness of Plsintft Sibedu being named as witness 68, Plein Sted as exptienced unfair reatment and retaliation dv o his race ait relates to Ms. Bhatnagar and Mary Browne filing to follow the conditions of the Collective Bargaising Agreement 69, Ms. Bhutnagar and Mery Browne singled Phin Sibeda out and targeted him by ‘sng extreme dpa with him when sh decided to volte the collective bargaining sgreement and sospended Pls Sibeda witout theuse of progressive dsspine 70. Ms. Bhatnagar and Mary Browne have violated Plaintiff Sibeu’s civil ight. 71. ‘Theylave taken extreme measures wi Pant Sibedu as a Back forsign minosty snl by suspending Pint Sibed with intent terminate im for an offense tat did ot rise tothe fevel per the collesive bargaining agreement 72. Neither of them gave Pani Sibedu prior nowiege of what the meeting was about ‘when May Browne gave Paint Sibedu bis ispliv 173, Plant Sibeda wos not given preliminary nie of disciplinary atin therefore Plaintiff Sibodu was not abe to have uion repesetaton 74, They misrepresented the nature ofthe meting to Pitt Sibed supervisor whois a [Nigerian Black Male. 75, ‘They withheld Plait ibedo’s termination fom Pluie Sibed’s supervisor de to {he fact he was no in agreement with this level of disepline. ‘Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 10 of 21 PagelD: 10 6. n 8, 2. 31 ™, 8. 84 1 should be noted Plain Sid's supervisor became emotional and cred when Pini Sibed vas tecminated “This is lent duo Plain Sibeda’s race and he politcal lima he is curently faced with the Mercer South Local Office under the management of Mary Browne. -Afterbeing named a witness unfawl eaiation end wites intimidation, defamation of Plantit Sibede’s character mounted. Pein Sibedu’s work with integrity and remain coacabl and teachable when forded the opportunity fom management owever management has fled to provide such, Plain ibedu's feelings of racial discrimination and retaliation were fer validated forPliat Sbed when one her counterparts whois white female named Ana Mare Sirota admited to May Browne and Enploye>Relaons tha she left kids ais by {alsifying an interview of a child named in the allegations ofa child abuse and neglect refer that was assigned to Plitiff Sed for investigation In ation to this, Ann Mate Sirota hada ease open in intake fran extensive amount of ime, “Tiss dret violation ofthe case practice model “The case required services to prpare forth babys bit and living arangement as som was not appropiate fo have the baby in er eae ‘As atest his negligence he cid was placed in the home of 70 year ld foster pase and ltr ein her care [Ath time he baby was placed there was a eatve that was a viable option and eating {or the sibling of the deceased, Case 3:14-0¥-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Flled 04/02/14 Page 11 of 21 PagelD: 11 a8, 89, 90, 51 2. 93. . 9s, In ight of such, Mary Browne decided to ignore placing the deceased baby with that relative as the Case Prctice Model requires, Despite the above violations of neglet of duty, flue to perform duty, conduct ‘unbecoming ofa public employes, incompetence, insubordination, violation of ules regulation policy and procedure, Mary Browne and Ils Bhatnagar afforded Ann Marie Sciartts the use of progressive discipline, ‘Ann Marie was left on the jb and alforded the opportunity to continue to work i tis hazardous fashion. ‘Ann Marie was given this typeof preferential treatment beeause she is a white female. ‘Shortly sfer Ann Marie was exposed fr falsifying records and not actually gong out and investigating a roferal Mary Browne had an audit conducted on Ann Marie's caseload that determined thece weee several other cases that reveated Ann Maric had falsified documentation and left referals uninvestigated Based on the above itis cleae tht progressive discipline and preferential retment is utilized by Mary Browne, Employee Relations and Mla Bhatnagar with white women and ignored with minorities and other nationalities. Racism unlawftl retaliation, witness tampering, intimidation, and harassment eannot ‘be condoned tolerated and this conduct warrants an investigation, Another example of infractions ofthis natwe at my employer include a white male ‘Wen Chewing who as been shown favoritism by Mary Browne and Employee Relations after puting children at risk he was no terminated He directly supervised a cas in the absence of the workers supervisor. This ease drew ‘media tention. The white male Wen Chewing covered the case and supervised the Case 3:14-cv-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 12 of 21 PagelD: 12 98, 99, 100, 101 1, 103. 108. 108. case, The back feral Tracy aco ho was absent fom the job ultimately was wrongly terminated as she had no dealings in the case. Plan alleged tothe EEOC that he was discriminated aginst based on his rave aod satinal vgn. Plan alleged he was eat in a humiliating and diseriminetory manner by his supervisors and white colleagues because of hi ace and national origin, Paint 8 reated different, amongst others, because of his race, “The timing and nature ofthe adverse employment ation of harassment are presumptive ‘evidence of Defendants? jscrminatory snd retalistory intent “The events that transpired indicate that Defendants actions were intended to punish Plaintiff fr acting a a witness for Tracy Bares ase Defendants’ actions weteetaliatry and based on animus towards Plains for asserting sights as atforded by, Now Jersey and Federal Lew. [RETALIATION ~ MARIE-IOE FARRIOR [Asa mineityHstan bask female, Pst arin evi rights have been voted, During her employes at the Deparment of Permanency and Protection (formerly ‘known as DYFS & DCF), Plait Fair hasbeen racially isriminated against for the following: ce, sx, ation orgina,retalio, and wrong eminton, fendans have engaged in wnethical behaviors because of Plant? Fartors rae and atonal origin. “The extreme measuts of harassment, rai, and wrongful termination are a dtet result of Plaintiff Fasir being a black Haitian female andl a witness intimation and Case 3:14-c¥-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 13 of 21 PagelD: 13 107. 108, 109, no, 1 12. 13, na. retaliation to prevent Plaintiff Farr from testifying for her former supervisor is clear bby her unwarranted termination, Plaintiff Farrior knows her whistleblower rights andthe conscientious employee act and this is a sheer attempt o block me from fstifying othe truc events that took place in the cise Barco vs. Sat of New Jersey Plein? Fariorhas never witesed such racial crimination in her years of service ‘ntl Mary Bowe became the loa office manager. English i not Paint Fares it language and Pin Faroe was often sitized upon the arval of Mary Browne for her writing and een Ila Bhatnagar is avave ofthat of Plait Furtor’s involvement as witness for her former supervises federal lavsuit against he State of Nev Hersey. Ils Bhatnagar nove took the necessary tops to disqualify herself from any involvement ‘wth Plaintiff Faror when she ad fl knowledge eonit of interest existed because Plaintiff Faso a witness forhee former supervisor Tracy Barco “The fet hat la Bhatnagar concealed her awareness of her prior involvement with Plainife Farsors former supervisor ina lawyer capacity and fo date te State's esa to produce certification that Il Bhatnagar has not been detox indirectly involved ‘with Barco v. DYFS witesses wart tention. “These are ethical ses that need to be investigated. ‘White males only resived minor disciline which i under five (5) day suspension. Defendants lao gave white males the opportunity to give back two (2) ofthe ‘vacation days and only serve one day suspension if they did nt exercise their igh appeal the discipline ofa five (5) day suspension Case 3:14-0V-02075-JAP-DEA Document 1 Filed 04/02/14 Page 14 of 21 PagelD: 14 us. 116, u. 118, is. m1. Anne Mave Scart (white foal) fii a child abuse noglet investigation intrvow: In doing this, Anne Mare Lf the children at rik of further abuse and neglect and she was not teninated. 1m another instance. Anne Mare Sear (white female) hasbeen out of compliance with the Modified Setlrent Agreement on moce than one occasion end faced no

    You might also like