Gee v. Becton

Employee Handbook Not Enough to Support Motion to Dismiss

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff commenced this action on October 16, 2023 alleging defamation per se and breach of contract. Presently before the Court is defendants’ pre-answer motion to dismiss based upon documentary evidence (CPLR 3211[a][1]) and failure to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211[a][7]). It is not disputed that on December 5, 2022 plaintiff was hired by Becton, Dickinson and Company (hereinafter BD) as an Associate Machinist. Defendant John Otoupal (hereinafter Otoupal) is a Team Leader and was plaintiff’s supervisor at BD’s facility in Glens Falls, New York. Shaneike Ayala (hereinafter Ayala) is the AccessHR Advisor. Prior to being hired, plaintiff received a letter dated November 22, 2022, signed by Otoupal, offering him employment with BD as an Associate Machinist at an hourly rate of $23.00 per hour with a $1.10 pay shift differential (hereinafter Offer Letter). Shortly thereafter, plaintiff received a copy of BD’s “Glens Falls Operation Associate Handbook” (hereinafter Handbook) and Associate Acknowledgement & Agreement which was signed by plaintiff on December 5, 2022. According to plaintiff, in May 2023 he was diagnosed with a tumor and lesions on his prostate. Plaintiff asserts he advised Otoupal that he needed time off for medical appointments but claims Otoupal informed him he could not take time off because he had to be employed for one year before he was permitted to take medical leave. In June 2023, plaintiff became ill at work and Otoupal advised plaintiff to go home and if he “had [paid time off he] could take it, [receive] no pay, or make up[the] time” (Compl. 38-39). On August 28, 2023 plaintiff called off sick, leaving a telephone message on the appropriate voicemail. Two days later, BD suspended plaintiff with pay after receiving complaints that he had exposed himself to another employee, made suggestive comments of a sexual nature and inappropriately touched an associate in a sexual manner at work. (Compl.

Gee v. Becton

Employee Handbook Not Enough to Support Motion to Dismiss

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal