Hickey v. Alacare Home Health & Hospice
Court Docket Sheet

Northern District of Alabama

5:2011-cv-02608 (alnd)

COMPLAINT against Alacare Home Health & Hospice, filed by Edna Caroline Hickey.

Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 1 of 16 FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION 2011 Jul-19 AM 09: 50 U. S. DISTRICT COURT N. D. OF ALABAMA EDNA CAROLINE HICKEY PLAINTIFF VS.) CASE NO: ALACARE HOME HEALTH & HOSPICE) DEFENDANT COMPLAINT This action is brought pursuant to the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967, 29 U. S. C. 621, et seq. 2. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U. S. C. $ 1343 (4) to secure protection and redress deprivation of rights secured by federal law whiclh polibit discrimination against employees because of their age. This action propertly lies in the Northern District of Alabama, pursuant to 28 U. S C. S 1391 (b) and 29 U. S. C. S1132 (c) (2). PARTIES 4. Plaintiff, Edna Caroline Ilickey (herein after referred to as Hickey) is a resident and citizen of Jackson County, Alabama and has been for all times material herein. 5. Defendant, AlaCare Home Health & Hospice (herein after referred to as AlaCare) is a company engaged in providing nursing services in the Jackson County area and employs more than 20 regular employees. The Plaintiff worked at Defendant s facility located in Scottsboro, Jackson County, Alabama. Plaintiff is a member of the protected class under the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1969, as her date of birth is December 29, 1948, and she is currently 62 years of age. Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 2 of 16 On or about August 12, 2008, Plaintiff was hired by AlaCare as a hospice nurse. Plaintiff continued in her employment with the Defendant until her termination on or about July 13, 2009 At the time of her termination, the Plaintiff was approximately 60 years of age. Plaintiff alleges she was initially hired as a hospice nurse and reported to supervisor, Betty Sullivan, a nurse who was in her mid-forties at the time. Plaintiff alleges she never received any complaints from Ms Sullivan about her work nor received any write-ups, reprimands or discipline. 10. Plaintiff alleges in or around January 2009, she was moved into a different department known as the home health division and Pam Hawes, District Administrator, became her supervisor. Based upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges Ms. Hawes was in her forties when the Plaintiff began working for her and the Plaintiff was 60 years of age at the time, 11. Plaintiff alleges she was one of the oldest employees for the Defendant at the time. 12. Plaintiff alleges that although her work performance did not change when she was assigned to the home health division, the attitude and behavior of her direct supervisor, Pam Hawes, was hostile toward the Plaintiff as a result of her age. Plaintiff alleges the Defendant's District Administrator began to berate the Plaintiff in meetings where other employees were present and continually made comments about the Plaintiffs age in referencing the computer system utilized by the Defendant. 13. Plaintiff particularly alleges in or around January 30, 2009, at a in-service training, Ms. Hawes. made the comment to the Plaintiff " I don t have this kind of problem in my office with the computer because my girls are all younger. " Plaintiff alleges Ms. Hawes was referring to her Rainsville office where all the employees were much younger than the Plaintiff. 14. A few weeks thereafter, Plaintiff alleges the Defendant s District Administrator Ms. Hawes, approached the Plaintiff while sitting with a table of nurses and began to snap her fingers at the Plaintiff, pointed directly in her face and informed the Plaintiff to get up now and get yourself to this table now! " Plaintiff alleges she was the oldest nurse at the table and the conversation by Ms Hawes was directed toward her. Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 3 of 16 15. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff alleges she was called into the office out of the field for a six month evaluation. Plaintiff alleges she had been offered an extension of her orientation because the Plaintiffs preceptor left in the middle of her training and the Plaintiff had not been properly trained. Plaintiff alleges Defendant s District Administrator, Ms. Hawes, referred to the extension of the Plaintiff's orientation by stating " okay. I understand all of that and I understand this computer is new and difficult and your generation doesn' t pick up as fast as these younger girls. " Plaintiff alleges the computer system was difficult for most, if not all, employees to grasp regardless of their age. Plaintiff alleges none of the younger workers were called into Ms. Hawes' office with any frequency, nor were they berated on an almost daily basis as the Plaintiff alleges herein. 16. Plaintiff alleges as time progressed, Ms. Hawes continued to single her out a and embarrass her in front of co-workers. Furthermore, Plaintiff alleges Ms Hawes would call the Plaintiff into her office routinely and berate the Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges on one occasion, she was asked by Ms Hawes why can' t you keep up. " Plaintiff alleges she was able to show Ms Hawes that she was mсeting and exceeding productivity. 17. Plaintiff allсges this type of beratement and discriminatory behavior continued to escalate until the Plaintiff suffered a panic attack at the office on or about March 31, 2009, as a result of the behavior of the Defendant's District Administrator Ms Hawes, 18. Plaintiff alleges that as she was undergoing this panic attack, Defendant's District Administrator, Ms Hawes, simply rolled her eyes, shook her head and walked past the Plaintiff in her distress 19. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff was forced to take a PRN' position with the Defendant which climinated her insurance benefits and reduced the Plaintiffs salary. Plaintiff alleges she was advised that if she did not agree to the PRN position, she would be terminated. Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 4 of 16 Plaintiff alleges that when she discussed this situation with Ms Hawes, Ms Hawes made a comment about the Plaintiff's advanced age and then commented about her own age which Plaintiff alleges she indicated was age 47 at the time. Additionally, Plaintiff alleges Ms Hawes referred to her in this particular meeting as " old. 20. Plaintiff alleges thereafter, on or about May 9, 2009, she had another meeting with Ms. Hawes wherein Ms. Hawes again referred to the Plaintiff's age. Plaintiff alleges Defendant's District Administrator indicated she was 47 years old and could not do the job the Plaintiff was being asked to do so she could understand why the Plaintiff could not do this job. 21. Plaintiff alleges that as a result of the constant beratement by Ms. Hawes about her age, she contacted the company's hotline and spoke with Nonette Sims-Perry in or around May 11 2009, to report the behavior of Ms. Hawes. Plaintiff further alleges that she was assured by Ms. Sims-Pсrry there would be no retaliation for the Plaintiff making her complaint. Plaintiff further alleges she provided Ms Sims-Perry detailed information concerning Ms. Hawes' direct statements about the Plaintiff's advanced age. This was not the first time Plaintiff alleges she reported said behavior to supcIvision at Defendant's facility. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges shc spoke with her former supervisor, Betty Sullivan, previously about the beratement and treatment of Ms HawCs due to the Plaintiff's age. Plaintiff alleges Ms. Sullivan, however, was also under Ms Hawes' supervision and nothing was done about these complaints. 22. Plaintiff alleges approximately one month after contacting the company hotlinc, Plaintiff was contacted by Defendant's Human Resources Manager, Kay Sikes, who advised she had discussed the matter with Ms Hawes and with Ms Sullivan and further advised Ms. Hawes did not deny the Plaintiffs allegations 23. Approximatсly seven weeks thereafter, Plaintiff alleges she was terminated by Ms. Hawes although the Plaintiff followed protocol and training as she had been instructed. 24. On or about July 29, 2009, Plaintiff filed an original Charge of Discrimination alleging age discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said Charge bearing number 420-2009-02458. On or about December 23, 2009, Plaintiff filcd an Amended Charge of Discrimination alleging age and retaliation, said charge bearing unber 420-2010. 00726. Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 5 of 16 25. On or about April 19, 2011, a Notice of Right to Sue was issued upon request by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on both of the Plaintiff s charges. Said Notice of Right to Sue was received by the Plaintiff on April 21, 2011. (see attached Exhibit A). This litigation has been timely filed and all preliminary administrative procedures have been exhausted. 26. As a proximate result of the discriminatory conduct of the Defendant, the Plaintiff was caused to suffer a loss of income when she was forced l to accept the demotion of PRN " designation and further suffered a loss of income and loss of her job when the Plaintiff was terminated. COUNT I Plaintiff realleges all allegations as set out above and further avers as follows: 27. Plaintiff alleges that the actions and conduct of the Defendant described in the aforementionсd statement constitutes action of age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination and EinployIment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U. S. C. $ 621, et seq. 28. Plaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against because of her age, 60, when she was placed under the supervision of Ms Pam Hawes, Division Administrator. 29. Plaintiff was caused to suffer extreme mental anguish, upset, disturbance, concern, humiliation, loss of self esteem and embarrassment as a direct and proximate result of the discrimination described in this Count and the factual allegations as set out above. 30. Furthermore, Plaintiff has been caused to lose monies in the form of wages and benefits, as a direct and proximate result of the conduct described herein. 31. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant s conduct as described herein is willful and/or wanton and/or reckless and/or sufficiently egregious and entitles the plaintiff to an award of punitive damages, costs and attorney's fees. COUNT II Comes now the Plaintiff in the above style cause and realleges each and every material, factual and legal avements as set out above and further avers as follows: Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 6 of 16 32. After the Defendant received notice of the Plaintiffs complaint of age discrimination by it's District Administrator, the Defendant, acting through its supervisors, agents, employees and proprietors terminated the Plaintiff in an effort to retaliate against her for exercising her rights under its policies and procedures and under the polices and procedures afforced to her pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and to punish the Plaintiff for utilizing the opportunities and remedies available to the Plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of 29 U. S. C. G621, et seq. 33. Furthermore, the Defendant, acting through agents, supervisors and proprietors engaged in conduct designed to discourage the Plaintiff from utilizing the processes available to her pursuant to the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967, as amended 34. Toward this end, the Plaintiff was terminated on or about July 13, 2009, approximately seven weeks after the Plaintiff contacted the company's Human Resources Department claiming the Defendant's District Administrator, Pam Hawes, had discriminated against her because of her age, 60. 35. Plaintiff alleges that the foregoing conduct and other conduct as specifically set out in this complaint has caused her to suffer humiliation, embarrassment, physical illness, hurt, anguish, loss of sleep, loss of quality of life, and emotional distress, all as a direct and proximate result of the conduct cescribed herein. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays for the following relief: (A) That this Court will impanel a jury and, upon consideration of the evidence in this complaint, grant to the Plaintiff full benefits to which she would entitled, including loss of pay, pre-and post judgment interest, and order that the defendant refrain from engaging in any type of retaliatory discriminatory conduct toward the Plaintiff or any other person similarly Situated: and (B) That this Court will grant to Plaintiff all compensation to which she is deemed entitled, including lost wages in excess of $ 75, 000. 00, and in addition thereto, that the Plaintiff be granted all compensatory damages for mental anguish, pain and suffering and such liquidated damages to which the Plaintiff would be deemed entitled; and Case 5: 11-cv-02608-SLB Document 1 Filed 07/18/11 Page 7 of 16 (C) That this Court will grant to the Plaintiff all punitive, exemplary and/or liquidated damages to the extent allowed by law for the purpose that punitive, exemplary and/or liquidated damages are awarded, that is, to punish the wrongdoer and to deter similar concuct being engaged in by others and to address the willful and/or reckless conduct of the Defendant acting through its agents, servants and/or employees, and (D) That this Court will Order the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff and/or her attorneys a reasonable fee for services provided by Plaintiff s attorney in this matter, and (E) That this Court will Order the Defendant and to her attorneys, pre-and post interest and cost, including all expert witness cost and such other cost as Plaintiff will incur or has incurred in this matter, and (FM) That this Court will order the Defendant to reinstate the Plaintiff with full back pay and benefits including interest and if appropriate that the Plaintiff s personnel file be purged of all adverse references and discipline that was developed as a result of the discriminatory conduct of the defendant. (G) Plaintiff prays for such other, full and complete relief to which she is entitled in the premises and full and co1mplete damages, both coinpensatory and punitive. S/GINA D. COGGIN Gina D. Coggin Attorney for Plaintiff ASB-3058-54G OF COUNSEL: RHEA, BOYD, RHEA & COGGIN 930 Forest Avenue Gadsden, AL 35901 Phone (256) 547 6801 Fax (256) 549-0271 ginaCoggin@rhealaw.com PLAINTIFF S DEMAND A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL ISSUES SERVE DEFENDANT BY CERTIFIED MAIL: AlaCare Home Health & Hospice 19855 John T. Reid Pkwy Scottsboro, Alabama 35768 Case 5: 11-cv-7908-SLB Document 1 Fiedl 07 Page 8 of 16/1 EEOC Form 161-8 108) U. S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUE (ISSUED ON REQUEST) To: Edna C. Hickey 3179 Lakeshore Drive Scottsboro, AL 35769 From: Birmingham Distrlct Office Ridge Park Place 1130 22nd Street RY T. Birmingham, AL 35205 APR 2 1 2 On behalf of person(s) aggrieved whose identity is CONFIDENTIAL (29 CFR S1601 7 (a) BY: EEOC Charge No. EEOC Representative Telephone No 420-2009-02458 Rita W. Sterling, Investigator (205) 212-2060' See also the additional information enclosed with this fom NOTICE TO THE PERSON AGGRIEVED: itle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA): This is your notice of Right to Sue, issued under Title VH, the ADA or GINA based on the above-numbered charge. It has been issued at your request Your lawsuit under Title VII, the ADA or GINA must be filed in a federal or state court WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of this notice, or your right to sue based on this charge will be lost (The time limit for filing suit based on a claim under state law may be different More than 180 days have passed since the filing of this charge. O Less than 180 days have passed since the filing of this charge, but I have determined that it is unlikely that the EEOC wi be able to complete its administrative processing within 180 days from the filing of this charge. The EEOC is terminating its processing of this charge. The EEOC will continue to process this charge Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): You may sue under the ADEA at any time from 60 days after the charge was filed until 90 days after you receive notice that we have completed action on the charge. In this regard, the paragraph marked below applies to your case: X The EEOC is closing your case. Therefore, your lawsuit under the ADEA must be filed in federal or state court WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of this Notice. Otherwise, your right to sue based on the above-numbered charge will be lost. J The EEOC is continuing its handling of your ADEA case. However, if 60 days have passed since the filing of the charge, you may file suit in federal or state court under the ADEA at this time. Equal Pay Act (EPA): You already have the right to sue under the EPA (filing an EEOC charge is not required.) EPA suits must be brought in federal or state court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the alleged EPA underpayment This means that backpay due for any violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years) before you file suit may not be collectible. If you file suit, based on this charge, please send a copy of your court complaint to this office. On behalf of the Commission One Alien Inveway 11 Enclosures(s) Delner Franklin-Thomas District Director (Date, failed) CC John W, Hargrove, Attorney Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP One Federal Place 1819 Fifth Avenue, North Birmingham, AL 35203-2119 Gina D, Coggin, Attorney Rhea, Boyd, Rhea & Coggin P. O. Box 8486 Gadsden, AL 35902: Case 5 11-cv-USOE SLB Document 1 Fied OTO Page 9 of 16-Enclosure with EEOC Form 161-B (11/09) INFORMATION RELATED TO FILING SUIT UNDER THE LAW ENFORCED BY THE EEOC (This information relates to filing suit in Federal or state court unde. ederal law. If you also plan to sue claiming violations of State law, please be aware that time limits and other provisions of State law may be shorter or more limited than those described below.) PRIVATE SUIT RIGHTS Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Genetic information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) In order to pursue this matter further, you must file a lawsuit against the respondent(s) named in the charge within 90 days of the date you receive this Notice. Therefore, you should keep a record of this date. Once this 90 day period is over, your right to sue based on the charge referred to in this Notice will be lost. If you intend to consult an attorney, you should do so promptly. Give your attorney a copy of this Notice, and its envelope, and tel him or her the date you received it Furthermore, in order to avoid any question that you did not act in a timely manner, it is prudent that your suit be filed within 90 days of the date this Notice was mailed to you (as indicated where the Notice is signed) or the date of the postmark, if later Your lawsuit may be filed in U. S. District Court or a State court of competent jurisdiction. (Usually, the appropriate State court is the general civil trial court.) Whether you file in Federal or State court is a matter for you to decide after talking to your attorney. Filing this Notice is not enough. You must file a " complaint " that contains a short statement of the facts of your case which shows that you are entitled to relief Your suit may include any matter alleged in the charge or, to the extent permitted by court decisions, matters like or related to the matters alleged in the charge. Generally, suits are brought in the State where the alleged unlawful practice occurred, but in some cases can be brought where relevant employment records are kept, where the employment would have been, or where the respondent has its main office. If you have simple questions, you usually can get answers from the office of the clerk of the court where you are bringing suit, but do not expect that office to write your complaint or make legal strategy decisions for PRIVATE SUIT RIGHTS Equal Pay Act (): EPA EPA suits must be filed in court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the alleged EPA underpayment: back pay due for violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years) before you file suit may not be collectible. For example, if you were underpaid under the EPA for work performed from 7/1/08 to 12/1/08, you should file suit before 7/1/10-not 12/1/10 in order to recover unpaid wages due for July 2008. This time limit for filing an EPA suit is separate from the 90-day filing period under Title VII, the ADA, GINA or the ADEA referred to above. Therefore, if you also plan to sue under Title VII, the ADA, GINA or the ADEA, in addition to suing on the EPA claim, suit must be filed within 90 days of this Notice and within the 2-or 3-year EPA back pay recovery period. ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION Title VII, the ADA or GINA: If you cannot afford or have been unable to obtain a lawyer to represent you, the U. S. District Court having jurisdiction in your case may, in limited circumstances, assist you in obtaining a lawyer. Requests for such assistance must be made to the U. S. District Court in the form and manner it requires (you should be prepared to explain in detail your efforts to retain an attorney). Requests should be made well before the end of the 90-day period mentioned above, because such requests do not relieve you of the requirement to bring suit within 90 days. ATTORNEY REFERRAL AND EEOC ASSISTANCE All Statutes: You may contact the EEOC representative shown on your Notice if you need help in finding a lawyer or if you have any questions about your legal rights, including advice on which U. S. District Court can hear your case. If you need to inspect or obtain a copy of information in EEOC's file on the charge, please request it promptly in writing and provide your charge number (as shown on your Notice). While EEOC destroys charge files after a certain time, all charge files are kept for at least 6 months after our last action on the case. Therefore, if you file suit and want to review the charge file, please make your review request within 6 months of this Notice. (Before filing suit, any request should be made within the next 90 days.) IF YOU FILE SUIT, PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR COURT COMPLAINT TO THIS OFFICE. Case 5: 11-cv. EEOC Fom 6 (5/ot CRGPS SLB Document 1 Filed 07 1 O Page 10 of 16 CHARGE OF DURIMINATION Charger resented To: Agency ies) Charge No(s): This form is affected by the Privacy Act of 1974. See enclosed Privacy Acl Statement and other information before completing this form. FEPA X EEOC (20-2009-02458 and EEOC State or local Agency if any Name (indicate Mr Ms, Mrs.) Home Phone (incl Area Code) Date of Birth I Ms. Edna C. Hickey A Street Address (256) 574-0993 12-29-1948 City, State and ZIP Code 3179 Lakeshore Drive, Scottsboro, AL 35769 Named is the Employer, Labor Organization, Employment Agency, Apprenticeship Committee, or State or Local Government Agency that Believe Discriminated Against Me or others. (If more than two, list under PARTICULARS below. Name No, Employees, Members Phone No. (Include Area Code) ALACARE HOME HEALTH & HOSPICE 500 or More (256) 259-1325 Street Address City, State and ZIP Code 19855 John T. Reid Pkwy, Scottsboro, AL 35768 Name No. Employees, Memb Phone No. (include Area Code) Street Address City, State and ZIP Co DISCRIMINATION BASED ON (Check appropriate box DATE(S) DISCRIMINATION TOOK PLACE Earliest Lates J RACE COLOR SEX O RELIGION O NATIONAL ORIGIN 02-16-2009 02-16-2009 RETALIATION XAGE DISABILITY OTHER (Speclly below. CONTINUING ACTION THE PARTICULARS ARE (if additional paper is needed, attach extra sheet(s): 1 am a sixty year old White female. I was employed by the above company. On February 16, 2009, Pam Hawes, Regional Director of the region that I worked made a statement to me about my age. Her statement was " I understand that the computer is new and difficult and the younger generation doesn' t have problems picking it up and it take less time and they' re faster than your generation. It would be hard for her to go out and do the job now so she knew that it would be hard for me was hired to work as a hospice nurse and on as needed bases to work with home health. The company combined the home health and hospice into one unit without giving me proper training. There was no training offered for me to learn the work in home health after I was moved out of hospice. Pam Hawes was only concerned about my age and not my being trained to work in the home health position. Pam Hawes made the statement that " she was 47 year old and she could not go out and do the job that they were asking us to do so understand why you would not be able to do it applied for a part time position to relieve the stress and the work load. On July 13, 2009 I was fired from my position with LY the company because Pam Hawes said that failed to follow protocol. I was never written up or counseled on the procedure she fired me on, therefore she did not follow the company procedures, I believe I was discriminated against because of my age in violation of Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). want this charge filed with both the EEOC and the State or local Agency, if any. NOTARY-Won nocessary for State " RECEIVED " will advise the agencies change Iny address or phone number and I will cooperate fully with them in the processing of my charge in accordance with their procedures. swear or affirm that I have read the above charge and that is true to declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct the best of my knowledge, informal SIGNATURE OF COMPLAINANT ments 2009 24 SMZooſ aro drive SwagG HIS F DAMD swBOESNFTEAMTNSTRICT OFT, Charging Party Signature EEOC Form 161-8/09) U. S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUE (IssUED ON REQUEST) To: Edna C. Hickey 3179 Lakeshore Drive Scottsboro, AL 35769 From Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place 139 22nd Street Birmingham, AL 35205 On behalf of person(s) aggrieved whose identity is CONFIDENTIAL (29 CFR 91601. 7 (a) EEOC Charge No. EEOC Representative Telephone No. 420-2010-00726 Rita W. Sterling, Investigator (205) 212-2060 See also the additional infomation enclosed with this fom NoTICE TO THE PERSON AGGRIEVED: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA): This is your Notice of Right to Sue, issued under Title VII, the ADA or GINA based on the above-numbered charge. It has been issued at your request. Your lawsuit under Title VII, the ADA or GINA must be filed in a federal or state court WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of this notice, or your right to sue based on this charge will be lost. (The time limit for filing suit based on a claim under state law may be different. More than 180 days have passed since the filing of this charge. X Less than 180 days have passed since the filing of this charge, but I have determined that it is unlikely that the EEOC w be able to complete its administrative processing within 180 days from the filing of this charge. The EEOC is terminating its processing of this charge. The EEOC will continue to process this charge. Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): You may sue under the ADEA at any time from 60 days after the charge was filed until 90 days after you receive notice that we have completed action on the charge. In this regard, the paragraph marked below applies to your case: X The EEOC is closing your case. Therefore, your lawsuit under the ADEA must be filed in federal or state court WITHIN 90 DAYS of your receipt of this Notice. Otherwise, your right to sue based on the above-numbered charge will be lost. 0 The EEOC is continuing its handling of your ADEA case. However, if 60 days have passed since the filing of the charge, you may file suit in federal or state court under the ADEA at this time Equal Pay Act (EPA): You already have the right to sue under the EPA (filing an EEOC charge is not required.) EPA suits must be brought in federal or state court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the alleged EPA underpayment This means that backpay due for any violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years) before you file suit may not be collectible. If you file suit, based on this charge, please send a copy of your court complaint to this office. On behalf of the Commission ADMendes 49 Enclosures(s) Delner Franklin-Thomas, District Director (Dale Maled) CC John W. Hargrove, Attorney Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP One Federal Place 1819 Fifth Avenue, North Birmingham, AL 35203-2119 Gina D, Coggin, Attorney Rhea, Boyd, Rhea & Coggin P. O, Box 8486 Gadsden, AL 35902 AFR 3 is Enclosure with EEOC Form 16 1/09) Case 5: 11-cv-0698-SLB Document 1 Filed OIBO Page 12 of 16 INFORMATION RELATED TO FILING Sr UNDER THE LAS ENFORCED BY THE EEOC (This information relates to filing suit in Federal or state court under Federal lar If you also plan to sue claiming violations of State law, please be aware that time limits and other provisions of State lawmay be shorter or more limited than those described below, PRIVATE SUIT RIGHTS Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA); In order to pursue this matter further, you must file a lawsuit against the respondent(s) named in the charge within 90 days of the date you receive this Notice. Therefore, you should keep a record of this date. Once this 90 day period is over your right to sue based on the charge referred to in this Notice wilf be lost. If you intend to consult an attorney, you should do so promptly. Give your attorney a copy of this Notice, and its envelope, and tel him or her the date you received it. Furthermore, in order to avoid any question that you did not act in a timely manner, it is prudent that your suit be filed within 90 days of the date this Notice was mailed to you (as indicated where the Notice is signed) or the date of the postmark, if later. Your lawsuit may be filed in U. S. District Court or a State court of competent jurisdiction, (Usually, the appropriate State court is the general civil trial court.) Whether you file in Federal or State court is a matter for you to decide after talking to your attorney. Filing this Notice is not enough. You must file a " complaint " that contains a short statement of the facts of your case which shows that you are entitled to relief. Your suit may include any matter alleged in the charge or, to the extent permitted by court decisions, matters like or related to the matters alleged in the charge. Generally, suits are brought in the State where the alleged unlawful practice occurred, but in some cases can be brought where relevant employment records are kept, where the employment would have been, or where the respondent has its main office. If you have simple questions, you usually can get answers from the office of the clerk of the court where you are bringing suit, but do not expect that office to write your complaint or make legal strategy decisions for you. PRIVATE SUIT RIGHTS--Equal Pay Act (EPA): EPA suits must be filed in court within 2 years (3 years for willful violations) of the alieged EPA underpayment: back pay due for violations that occurred more than 2 years (3 years, before you file suit may not be collectible. For example, if you were underpaid under the EPA for work performed from 7/1/08 to 12/1/08, you should file suit before 7/1/10--not 12/1/10 in order to recover unpaid wages due for July 2008. This time limit for filing an EPA suit is separate from the 90-day filing period under Title VII, the ADA, GINA or the ADEA referred to above. Therefore, if you also plan to sue under Title VII, the ADA, GINA or the ADEA, in addition to suing on the EPA claim, suit must be filed within 90 days of this Notice and within the 2-or 3-year EPA back pay recovery period, ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION--Title VL, the ADA or GINA: If you cannot afford or have been unable to obtain a lawyer to represent you, the U. S. District Court having jurisdiction in your case may, in limited circumstances, assist you in obtaining a lawyer. Requests for such assistance must be made to the U. S. District Court in the form and manner it requires (you should be prepared to explain in detail your efforts to retain an attorney). Requests should be made well before the end of the 90-day period mentioned above, because such requests do not relieve you of the requirement to bring suit within 90 days ATTORNEY REFERRAL AND EEOC ASSISTANCE--All Statutes You may contact the EEOC representative shown on your notice if you need help in finding a lawyer or if you have any questions about your legal rights, including advice on which U. S. District Court can hear your case. If you need to inspect or obtain a copy of information in EEOC's file on the charge, please request it promptly in writing and provide your charge number (as shown on your Notice). While EEOC destroys charge files after a certain time, all charge files are kept for at least 6 months after our last action on the case. Therefore, if you file suit and want to review the charge file, please make your review request within 6 months of this Notice. (Before filing suit, any request should be made within the next 90 days. IF YOU FILESUIT, PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR COURT COMPLAINT TO THIS OFFICE. Case 5. 1-CV CHARGE OF BIS INATION AMENDED This form is affected by the Privacy Act of 1974; See Privacy Act Statement before cornplating this CHARGE NUMBER AGEN O FEPA lao-aD10-007as KEEOc form 4ZUCYOUZ4JO and EEOC State or local Age Icy if an NAME (Indicate Mr, Ms, Mrs.) Ms. EDNA C. HICKEY HOME TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 256-374-0993 STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE 3179 LAKESHORE DRIVE, SCOTTSBORO, AL 35769 DATE OF BIRTH 12-29-1948 NAMED IS THE EMPLOYER, LABOR ORGANIZATION, EMPLOYMENT AGENCY, APPRENTICESHIP COMMITTEE, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY WHO DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ME (if more than one list below. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, MEMBERS ALACARE HOME HEALTH & HOSPICE 500 OR MORE TELEPHONE (include Area Code) 256-259-1325 STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE 19855 JOHN T. REID PKWY, SCOTTSBORO, AL 25768 COUNTY NAME TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Area Code) STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE COUNTY CAUSE OF DISCRIMINATION BASED ON (Check appropriate box (es)) DATE DISCRIMINATION TOOK PLACE EARLIEST (ADEAEPA) LATEST (ALL) J RACE O COLOR O SEX X O RETALIATION NATIONAL RELIGION X AGE 1/2009 7/13/2009 DISABILITY OTHER (Specify ORIGIN LOU CONTINUING ACTION THE PARTICULARS ARE (If additional paper is needed, attach extra sheet(s). PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PARTICULARS WHICH ARE TO BE INCORPORATED WITH THE INITIAL CHARGE OF DISCRIMINATION RETT CH DEC 2 3 2009 Servis HaitiaRM ELSTPOINT F sail IOTARY want this charge filed with both the EEOC and the state or local Agency, If any, essary fof state ocal Requirements) will advise the agencies if change my address or telephone number and J wi cooperate fully with them in the processing of my charge in accordance with theil swear or affirm that I have read the above charge arid that is true to proceedure best of my knowledge, information and belie! h/2m t declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. IRE OF COMPLAINANT Paula ME THIS DATE Oate Geolis, butz (Day, mont h, and yea Charging Party (Signatur IH EEOC FORM 5 (10/94) Case 5: 11-cv-0.-SLB Document 1 Filed 67 18/KD Page 14 of 16 AMENDED CHARGE 60 7a My date of birth is December 29, 1948, I am 61 years old, and began employment with the Defendant August 12, 2008. I initially worked for the respondent as a hospice nurse and reported to Supervisor, Betty Sullivan, who is in her mid-forties. I never received any complaints from Ms. Su ivan about my work under her supervision. In January 2009, I was moved into the home health division and Pam Hawes, District Administrator became my supervisor. There were several functions of my job as a home health nurse which were different than the functions of my job as a hospice nurse. All of my previous employment and training had been as a hospice nurse. I first noticed a hostile attitude from Ms Hawes in January 2009 during a nursing meeting when Ms. Hawes asked for input on how the nurses felt about merging home health and hospice. She went around the room and asked each nurses' opinion but when she got to me she stated " I already know your opinion and I don' t need to hear it again. " A few days later, on January 30, 2009, we were having in-service training with Betty Sullivan and Pam Hawes about PDA documentation and discussed the changes from hospice to home health. Pain made the comment I don' t have this kind of problem in my office with the computer because my girls are all younger. " This statement was direct response to the initial problems I was having learning the PDA documentation. In early February 2009, I was sitting with a table full of nurses and my seat was pushed back from the table. Ms Hlawes began to snap her fingers and pointed in my face stating I want you girls to get up, get up now and get yourselves to this table now! " She was speaking only to me and embarrassed me in front of the other nursing staff. To my knowledge, I was the oldest nurse at the table. On or about February 16, 2009, I was called out of the field into the office for my six month evaluation with Ms Sullivan and Ms Hawes. I had previously been offered an extension of my orientation period because my preceptor, Nancy Grissom, left in the middle of my training and I had not been properly trained. Ms Hawes referred to the extension of my orientation period and advised me it was unusual for anyone to have to ask for extended orientation. After l again reiterated the situation, she stated " Ok. I understand all of that and I understand this computer is new and difficult and your generation doesn' t pick up as fast as these younger girls. She continued by stating, it would be hard for me to go out and do this now myself but you' ve had enough time and if you' re going to work for this company, I expect you to have this worked out. I informed her that I had been told by more than one co-employee that it took them a full year get all of the kinks worked out with the Conmiputer system. She simply advised that we would talk about this again. As time progressed, it seemed that every time Pam was in the office she would single me out. In one particular meeting, we were working on patient documentation on the PDA and Pam walked over to me and yelled " giver me that pen; you re driving me crazy tapping. " She did this in front of a room full off my peers. Additionally, she would cal me into her office so often that it became a joke among my peers when the office door was closed that I was being talked to by Ms Hawes. In o: round March 19, 2009, was called into Pam's office after an IDG meeting and she asked why my productivity was notmet. She called Wayne into the office to witness the conversation and said that was not able to keep up productivity. She spec, ically asked why can' t you keep up. When asked what she was referring to she stated " your apparent inability to keep up. " When we discussed what productivity was, she was repeating her statement about how slow I was. When I asked for Specific dates and told he hat had met and exceeded productivity, she advised she could look up:: 19 OEC 2 2 2009 Case 5: 11-cv-92698-SLB Document 1 Filed lo7 181 Page 15 of 16 OS 72 my times and show what I Ihad done. When the computer time verified that I was meeting and exceeding productivity, she stated " according to my source you' re not doing your work, On or about March 31, 2009, I had a nic attack at the office due to the stress Ms Hawes was placing upon me. I believe her behavior was directly related to my age and her expressed desire to employ younger individuals. Because of Ms Hlawes consistent beratement of me, I was forced to take a PRN position with then which eliminated my insurance benefits and reduced my salary. When nformed Ms. Hawes I was taking the PRN position, she made a comment about my age and then commented that she was 47. I spoke specifically with Betty Sullivan about Pam Hawes' treatment of ime due to my age and she suggested that I contact Ms Hawe's supervisor Nancy Grissom to report the behavior. Shortl thereafter, I spoke with Ms Hawes about the PRN position and she advised that she did not think I could learn the computer or the PDA enough to do any work. She also said " I know you have done very detailed work in the past but you don' t seem to be able to do that now. I don' t think you can physically do this kind of work. " As I left the meeting, I felt she made these comments all as a result of my age and referred to me as ſold On or about May 9, 2009, I had another conversation with Ms Hawes and she again referred to my age and stated that she was 47 years old and couldn' t do the job that we were asked to do so she could understand that I couldn' t do this job. " Because of her constant beratement about my age I contacted the hotline and spoke with Nonette Sims-Perry onMay 11, 2009. I informed Ms. Perry that I had been subjected to a hostile work environment due to age discrimination and voiced IT my firther concerns of retaliation for lodging my complaint Ms Sims-Perry assured me there would be no retaliation for making my complaints. I also provided her information about some of Ms Hawes' direct statements about my age. In June 2009, I received a call from Kay Sikes, Human Resources Manager and she informed me that she had a discussion with Pam and Betty. She advised that Pam did not deny she said those things about my age but stated " you know she didn' t mean it. " When I asked her what she meant because Pam has specifically mentioned my age on several occasions and every time I leave a meeting I fee. demeaned and beaten down. Kay stated " you just have to know Pam-she just comes across different. Let me find a way to describe her Kay then attempted to find words to describe Ms Hawes and finally stated " she's just very professional and straight forward; she doesn' t have time for chit-chat. " I began to understand that I would not receive any assistance and informed Ms Sikes you and I both know the statements she's made are inappropriate. " Ms. Sikes agreed and said " Oh, yes. " Ms. Sikes then informed me that they do not tolerate this type of behavior but failed to clo nything to assist me with the beratement and behavior I received from Pam. Approximately seven weeks later, on July 9, 2009, responded to an assignment to provided services to a patient and took some laboratory readings from the patient. I was unable to send these to the respondent because the patient's Lad not been made av. able ISL nil to my trainin attempted to contact the patient's physician by telephone to advise of the values. The physician's office was closed So I left a message with the patient's information and lab values just as I had done In the past when I had been unable to reach a physician. The next morning, I again tried to speak to DE 2 3 2009 Case 5: 11-cv-02BR8-SLB Document 1 Filedlo7/18D. Page 16 of 16 O 7a. Someone in the physician's office and the receptionist answered my call. I was referred to the physician's nurse and the nurse was not available, so I again left the patient's information on the nurses voicemail with the understanding that the nurse would check the message and obtain this information shortly. On July 13, 2009, the physician's nurse contacted the respondent and informed them she had just checked her messages and received the patient's information. She also informed the respondent that these lab values were considered critical. Critical ranges for laboratory findings are known to vary from physician to physician and across different situations. Although I followed protocol and training I was terminated by Ms Hawes. From the time I began working in home health in January 2009, I only received one day precert training, one day paperwork training and no PDA documenting training. I believe I have been discriminated against because of my age, 60, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Ifunther believe that I have been retaliated against because I made a complaint against my supervisor and, shortly thereafter, was terminated from my employment. I believe I have been discriminated against, subjected to a hostile work environment and retaliated against, all as a result of my age, in violation of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act. OEC 2 3 2009

Interested in this case?

Sign up to receive real-time updates
Last full docket sheet refresh: 471 days ago. Refresh now
#
Datesort arrow up
Description
1
07/18/2011
COMPLAINT against Alacare Home Health & Hospice, filed by Edna Caroline Hickey.
07/18/2011
Request for service by certified mail filed by Edna Caroline Hickey, contained within the complaint. (Text entry; no document attached.)
07/19/2011
Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 350, receipt_number 1126-1441454. related document 1 COMPLAINT against Alacare Home Health & Hospice, filed by Edna Caroline Hickey. USDC Rcpt #: B4601025065 - Modified on 7/20/2011 (Text entry; no document attached.)
2
07/21/2011
Summons Issued as to Alacare Home Health & Hospice. Mailed cert mail, this date.
3
08/05/2011
ANSWER to Complaint by Alacare Home Health & Hospice.
4
09/20/2011
ORDER Scheduling Conference set for 11/10/2011 09:00 AM before Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 9/20/2011.
1
16b instructions
1 Attachment
5
09/23/2011
REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting.
6
11/10/2011
ORDER scheduling that certain time limits apply as set out in this order; Discovery due by 6/4/2012. Dispositive motions due 6/22/2012; pretrial needed; Jury Trial set for 9/24/2012 09:00 AM in Federal Courthouse, Huntsville, AL before Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 11/10/2011.
1
Exhibit A
2
Exhibit B
2 Attachments
7
11/10/2011
ORDER regarding attorney and non-attorney time records. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 11/10/2011.
8
03/14/2012
MOTION for Hipaa Order by Alacare Home Health & Hospice.
1
Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order
1 Attachment
9
03/19/2012
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Mediation. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 3/19/2012.
10
03/30/2012
NOTICE by Alacare Home Health & Hospice Joint Notice of Selection of Mediator
11
04/06/2012
ORDER that the parties have selected Brad Wash as mediator in this case. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 4/6/2012.
12
04/10/2012
ORDER HIPAA Order granting 8. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 04/10/2012.
13
05/10/2012
Joint MOTION for Protective Order Governing the Exchange of Confidential Material by Alacare Home Health & Hospice.
14
05/24/2012
ORDER granting 13 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 05/24/2012.
15
06/22/2012
MOTION for Summary Judgment by Alacare Home Health & Hospice.
16
06/22/2012
Brief re 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Alacare Home Health & Hospice.
17
06/22/2012
Evidentiary Material re: 16 Brief, 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment.
1
Exhibit 1 part 1
2
Exhibit 1 part 2
3
Exhibit 1 part 3
4
Exhibit 2
5
Exhibit 3
6
Exhibit 4 part 1
7
Exhibit 4 part 2
8
Exhibit 5
8 Attachments
18
06/25/2012
ORDER Setting Hearing on Motion 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment : Oral Argument is set for 8/13/2012 02:00 PM in Hugo L Black US Courthouse, Birmingham, AL before Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 6/25/2012.
19
07/19/2012
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by Edna Caroline Hickey.
20
08/01/2012
STATUS REPORT Report of Mediator by Alacare Home Health & Hospice, Edna Caroline Hickey, Mediator. filed by Alacare Home Health & Hospice, Edna Caroline Hickey, Mediator
21
08/02/2012
ORDER that the court has been notified by counsel that this matter has been settled; DISMISSING CASE without prejudice to the right of any party to petition to reopen within 60 days or submit a stipulated form of final judgment; motion hearing set for 8/13/2012 at 2:00pm is cancelled. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 8/2/2012.
Would you like this case removed from DocketBird? Request removal.