Schulte Roth Ex-Employee Sues, Alleging Sexist, Homophobic Remarks Made in Office
Sebastian Alonzo said he endured abuse from Schulte co-workers for years, while managers and the firm's human resources department did nothing to stop it.
August 21, 2019 at 01:40 PM
4 minute read
This story has been updated with comments from the plaintiff's lawyer.
A former facilities employee at New York-based Schulte Roth & Zabel has accused the firm of turning a blind eye to sexist, homophobic, anti-Catholic and anti-Ecuadorian remarks that he said were directed at him and others by his colleagues.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Manhattan Supreme Court, the former Schulte employee, Sebastian Alonzo, said he saw facilities department staff "engage[ed] in blatant and overt sexist and sexually harassing behavior." Alonzo, who worked at the firm for 10 years, regularly saw colleagues laugh and join in as a co-worker made "disgusting comments about women and bragged about sexually harassing female employees," his suit said.
When Alonzo didn't join in, his suit alleges, a colleague bullied him, calling him a "faggot," "homo" and "gay" in the presence of managers who did nothing to stop it.
One supervisor "regularly examined plaintiff's clothing and then made sarcastic comments while touching his sleeve, such as 'I like your shirt,' 'nice shirt,' 'nice pants' or 'nice shoes,'" the suit said. "These comments were clearly meant to insult plaintiff and made for the amusement of the other employees who witnessed the comments."
One colleague called Alonzo "the devil" after learning he was Catholic and told him to "go back to Ecuador." Another co-worker also made profane remarks about Alonzo's national origin even though he was born in New York City, the suit said. Alonzo developed anxiety and depression because of the bullying, he claimed.
In 2016, Alonzo said, he got sick of the "abuse" he encountered and included comments on his self-evaluation that referred to "situations of conflict" and contrasted constructive criticism with "putting someone down or being discouraging." In response, he said, his supervisors and the law firm's human resources director "attack[ed]" him and said in a meeting he was being "too sensitive."
Alonzo said he met with the HR director again, only for his complaints to be brushed aside. He said he was subsequently chewed out and disciplined for complaining that his work phone was old and for allegedly losing an office key, which he said didn't happen. He said he reported the misconduct to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in June 2017.
The alleged abuse escalated, with one colleague threatening to punch him in the face for not having said "good morning," according to the suit. Alonzo said his supervisors were aware of the threat but did nothing about it in hopes that he would quit. After other incidents, Alonzo said, he quit in December 2017 because "his mental health had deteriorated to a point where he could no longer function at work."
The suit seeks more than $1.5 million for alleged gender, sex and national origin discrimination and retaliation under city and state human rights laws. He also said he was not paid overtime that is required under state law.
In a statement, the firm said it investigated Alonzo's complaints, as did the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which declined to act on his allegations.
"We take complaints very seriously to ensure the safety and well-being of our employees," the statement said. "Our firm has been dedicated to fostering a diverse, respectful and inclusive culture, and this is a top priority. Mr. Alonzo's complaint was thoroughly investigated by the firm and the EEOC. The EEOC dismissed the charges in July 2019."
Megan Goddard of Goddard Law, who represents Alonzo, said she was proud of her client and said an EEOC dismissal doesn't mean that a case lacks merit or that an employer acted lawfully.
"It means that the EEOC, with its limited resources, is unable to find enough evidence to prove that discrimination under federal law occurred," she said in an email. "We look forward to seeking justice in court."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhy Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
6 minute readEuropean, US Litigation Funding Experts Look for Commonalities at NYU Event
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250