United Space Alliance, LLC – Sexual Harassment State Claim, Hostile Work Environment

United Space Alliance, LLC – Sexual Harassment State Claim, Hostile Work Environment

Sexual HarassmentIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO.

DENISE FARMER,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNITED SPACE ALLIANCE, LLC,
and LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE
OPERATIONS COMPANY,

Defendants.
___________________________/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Plaintiff, DENISE FARMER, by and through her undersigned counsel, sues Defendants, UNITED SPACE ALLIANCE, LLC, (hereinafter “USA”) and LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE OPERATIONS COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as “LOCKHEED”), and alleges as follows:
1. This is an action for damages that exceed $15,000.00, exclusive of costs, interest, and attorney’s fees.
2. The unlawful employment practices alleged below were committed within Brevard County, Florida.

PARTIES
3. Plaintiff is a female who resides in Brevard County, Florida, and has at all times material herein resided in Brevard County, Florida.
4. Defendant Lockheed is a Nevada corporation, registered and doing business in the State of Florida.
5. Defendant USA is a Delaware corporation, registered and doing business in the State of Florida.

STATEMENT OF CLAIM
6. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorney and agreed to pay him a reasonable fee.
7. Plaintiff has exhausted her administrative remedies prior to bringing this action.
8. Plaintiff has complied with all conditions precedent prior to bringing this action.
9. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant Lockheed in the positions of Expediter and Auditor.
10. While Plaintiff was employed by Defendant Lockheed, Defendant USA became the successor in interest to Defendant Lockheed regarding its contract to perform services at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. Plaintiff had been employed by Lockheed under this contract, and continued in her employment with USA as an Auditor.
11. Plaintiff was hired on or about April 1986 by Lockheed.
12. Plaintiff was terminated by Defendant USA on or about June, 1996.

COUNT I
SEXUAL HARASSMENT — HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
STATE CLAIM
13. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 12 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
14. This action is brought pursuant to Section 760.10, Florida Statutes, 1995.
15. Plaintiff filed a claim with the Florida Commission on Human Relations and more than one hundred eighty (180) days have passed since the filing of said complaint.
16. Plaintiff, a female, while employed by Defendants Lockheed and USA, has been subjected to sexual harassment by a co-worker. Plaintiff, during her employment with Defendants, was also subjected to a hostile work environment by her supervisors, co-workers and the Defendants’ management.
17. The sexual harassment of Plaintiff by Defendants’ employee, consisted of: constant and relentless pressure to engage in a romantic, sexual relationship; unwanted and unsolicited physical touching of Plaintiff; sexually suggestive comments made to Plaintiff; and unsolicited phone calls of a sexually suggestive nature made to Plaintiff’s residence at night.
18. Plaintiff repeatedly asked the perpetrator of the sexual harassment to cease his actions, and when he did not cease the harassment, Plaintiff complained of the sexual harassment by Defendant’s employee to Defendants’ corporate counsel. Plaintiff also spoke to her lead and supervisor regarding the sexual harassment by Defendants’ employee.
19. Defendants, thus apprised of the sexual harassment of Plaintiff by her co-worker, failed to take remedial action to correct the problem. The sexual harassment of Plaintiff did not cease after she discussed the sexual harassment and hostile work environment with the Defendants’ corporate counsel, Plaintiff’s lead and Plaintiff’s supervisor.
20. The hostile work environment created by Defendant’s management consisted of: failure of Defendants’ management to end the sexual harassment of Plaintiff by Plaintiff’s co-worker; verbal and physical abuse and hostility directed at Plaintiff by her supervisors and co-workers, including the perpetrator of the sexual harassment, which was apparent to her co-workers; derisive comments made about Plaintiff because she had filed sexual harassment charges; being transferred into jobs requiring heavy lifting, customarily performed by the stronger male employees of Defendants, which Plaintiff was physically not able to perform, when there was no indication that Plaintiff’s previous position had been eliminated or that she was not performing adequately; condemnation from Defendants’ management because she had consulted the Defendants’ corporate attorneys regarding the sexual harassment; taunting and teasing from co-workers and supervisors because she had filed sexual harassment charges; and Plaintiff’s being subjected to a work environment wherein co-workers were told by supervisors not to associate with Plaintiff for fear that they might be subject to sexual harassment charges.
21. Plaintiff did not encourage, welcome or consent to the harassment described in paragraphs 17 and 20.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, for all damages to which she may be entitled, including, without limitation:
A. Back pay
B. Front pay
C. Damages for mental anguish
D. Damages for loss of dignity
E. Punitive damages
F. Reasonable attorney fees and costs of this action

COUNT II
RETALIATION -STATE CLAIM
22. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 12, 14 though 17, and 21 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
23. Plaintiff gave Defendants notice of the sexual harassment described in this Complaint by reporting it to Defendants’ corporate attorneys and to her supervisors. After Plaintiff reported the harassment, she was unlawfully retaliated against for reporting the above described unlawful employment practices. Such retaliation on the part of Defendants included: verbal and physical abuse and hostility directed at Plaintiff by her supervisors and co-workers which was apparent to her co-workers; being transferred into jobs requiring heavy lifting, customarily performed by the stronger male employees of Defendants, which Plaintiff was physically not able to perform, when there was no indication that Plaintiff’s previous position had been eliminated or that she was not performing adequately; derisive comments made about Plaintiff because she had filed sexual harassment charges; condemnation from her supervisors because she had consulted the Defendants’ corporate attorneys regarding the sexual harassment; taunting and teasing from co-workers and supervisors because she had filed sexual harassment charges; Plaintiff being ordered by Defendants’ management personnel not to leave her work area for any purpose other than her 30-minute lunch break and restroom breaks when no such restrictions applied to the other employees in her work area; Plaintiff not being allowed personal phone calls when no such restrictions applied to the other employees in her work area; Plaintiff being excluded from group meetings which concerned her, and the projects she was working on; the taping and revealing to Defendants’ corporate attorney, of Plaintiff’s confidential conversations with Defendants’ Employee Assistance Program counselor, regarding the sexual harassment charges she filed; Plaintiff being subjected to a work environment wherein co-workers were told by supervisors not to associate with Plaintiff for fear that they might be subject to sexual harassment charges; Plaintiff being constructively discharged by being subjected to a hostile work environment so stressful and humiliating that Plaintiff had no alternative but to accept a “voluntary layoff”; and Plaintiff not being given a reasonable amount of time within which to consider accepting Defendant USA’s mandatory offer of re-employment pursuant to established union seniority guidelines.
24. Defendants had actual and constructive notice of the harassment and retaliation described in this Complaint because such harassment was pervasive and obvious and was in fact perpetrated by Defendants’ employees, including management employees.
25. Defendants failed to take remedial action in response to Plaintiff’s complaints regarding the sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and the retaliation to which Plaintiff was subjected.
26. The acts alleged in this Complaint constitute a violation of Section 760.10(7), Florida Statutes, 1995, “It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer…to discriminate against any person because that person has opposed any practice which is an unlawful employment practice under this section, or because that person has made a charge, testified, assisted in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this section.”
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, for all damages to which she may be entitled, including, without limitation:
A. Back pay
B. Front pay
C. Damages for mental anguish
F. Damages for loss of dignity
G. Punitive damages
F. Reasonable attorney fees and costs of this action

COUNT III
SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
FEDERAL CLAIM
27. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 12 and 16 through 21 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
28. The actions described in this Complaint constitute a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-2, regarding unlawful employment practices.
29. Plaintiff filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and more than one hundred eighty (180) days have passed since the filing of said complaint.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, for all damages to which she may be entitled, including, without limitation:
A. Back pay
B. Front pay
C. Damages for mental anguish
D. Damages for loss of dignity
E. Punitive damages
F. Reasonable attorney fees and costs of this action

COUNT IV
RETALIATION – FEDERAL CLAIM
30. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 12, 14 through 17, 21, and 23 through 25 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
31. The actions described in this Complaint constitute a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-3, regarding “other” unlawful employment practices.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, for all damages to which she may be entitled, including, without limitation:
A. Back pay
B. Front pay
C. Damages for mental anguish
D. Damages for loss of dignity
E. Punitive damages
F. Reasonable attorney fees and costs of this action.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues herein triable by jury.
DATED this _____day of _________________, 1999.

Wayne L. Allen, Trial Counsel
Florida Bar No. 110025 and
R. Brent Blackburn
Florida Bar No. 093270
Attorney for Plaintiff
Wayne L. Allen, P.A.
700 N. Wickham Road, Ste 107
Melbourne, Florida 32935
Phone: (407) 254-7550
Fax: (407) 242-1681

Attorney: Maurice Arcadier
Status: Closed
Date Filed: 01/13/1999

Our Melbourne office is centrally located in Brevard County, enabling our lawyers to serve clients throughout “the Space Coast”, including Cocoa Beach, Palm Bay and Vero Beach.