Dive Brief:
- A North Carolina-based Courtyard by Marriott hotel will have to face a lawsuit alleging that it retaliated against a former assistant general manager after she requested leave to obtain gender-affirming surgeries, a federal judge ruled Wednesday (Fendel v. Shreeji Hotel Group, LLC).
- U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell denied a motion to dismiss the case by Shreeji Hotel Group, owner of the Courtyard by Marriott, but approved the dismissal of the case against Hotel Equities, the management company employed by Shreeji Hotel Group to hire and manage employees, according to court documents.
- The plaintiff “alleged sufficient allegations to state plausible claims” against Shreeji Hotel Group, the judge said, but not Hotel Equities. A lawyer for the plaintiff said her client declined to comment, and Shreeji Hotel Group did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
Dive Insight:
The plaintiff alleged disability and gender identity discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act and interference with her Family and Medical Leave Act rights.
However, Shreeji Hotel Group said it was never the plaintiff’s employers under Title VII, the ADA or the FMLA.
The judge disagreed, saying Shreeji Hotel Group was “more than simply the absent owner” of the hotel, per the order. “Rather, [the plaintiff] alleges that SHG’s owners regularly visited the Hotel and sought to be kept informed about [her] medical situation.”
The plaintiff alleged that the group said it was “assuming control of management” of the hotel and that it made the decision to terminate her employment, which was announced at the same time.
“Indeed, the fair inference from the allegations of the Amended Complaint is that SHG, not HE, was the sole decision-maker regarding the conduct challenged as unlawful,” the judge said.
The plaintiff requested and was approved for three separate leaves of absence for “medically necessary, gender-affirming care done in multiple stages,” according to the complaint. However, soon after being approved for the third leave, she was told her position, as well as that of other assistant general managers, was being eliminated. Yet her role is the only one that was cut, she alleged.
