Where a woman grounded her sex discrimination claim on allegations that she was constructively discharged, she was not transferred from her supervisor’s team and her work hours were cut, but she did not plead facts making her constructive discharge claim plausible, a failure to transfer is not an adverse employment action under Title VII and she pleaded no facts plausibly showing the reduction in work hours was “because of” her sex, this claim was dismissed.
Stephanie Boudreaux filed a four-count amended complaint against Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., or BAH: (1) gender discrimination under Title VII, retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, Title VII retaliation and retaliation under the Virginia Human Rights Act, or VHRA. BAH has filed a motion to dismiss.
Title VII and the ADA require plaintiffs in Virginia to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of an alleged unlawful employment action. Title VII “precludes recovery for discrete acts of discrimination or retaliation that occur outside the statutory time period.”
Boudreaux filed her EEOC charge on or about Sept. 13, 2023. Thus, BAH asserts that Boudreaux’s allegations preceding Nov. 17, 2022, are time barred. Boudreaux’s sole rebuttal is that the “continuing violation” theory saves pre-Nov. 17, 2022, allegations. The court disagrees.
“[I]t is well-settled that the continuing violation theory only applies to hostile work environment claims.” Boudreaux explicitly denies that she is...
BAKU, Azerbaijan, May 20. The United States is using the UN Security Council to spread false information about Iran and its peaceful nuclear program, the Permanent Mission of Iran to the UN said i...