Krzesaj v., 16 Civ. 2926 (ER)

JANUSZ KRZESAJ, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, JUDY HENRY,in her official and individual capacity, and LUIS SANTIAGO,in his official and individual capacity, Defendants.

16 Civ. 2926 (ER)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

March 15, 2017

OPINION AND ORDER

Ramos, D.J.:

Plaintiff Janusz Krzesaj brings this action against New York City Department of Education ("DOE"), and Principal Judy Henry and Assistant Principal Luis Santiago, in their official and individual capacities (together, "Defendants"), alleging employment discrimination and retaliation, intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, and defamation. Before the Court is Defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

For the reasons stated below, Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

I. Factual Background¹

Plaintiff is a forty-nine year old Polish man. Amended Complaint ¶ 9. He has numerous master's degrees, including in education, physical education and sports psychology, exercisescience, and sports management, and previously taught physical education at a primary school in Poland. Id. at ¶ 17. In addition to playing professional soccer in Europe, Plaintiff has also coached a number of different sports and has several coaching licenses. Id.

In February 2004, Plaintiff, a member of the United Federation of Teachers ("UFT"), was hired as a full time physical education teacher at the Queens Gateway to Health Sciences Secondary School ("Gateway").² Id. at ¶ 12. At Gateway, Plaintiff started a number of athletic and educational programs. For example, he helped Gateway join the Public School Athletic League ("PSAL") by creating eligible rugby, cross country, volleyball, track and field, and basketball teams. He also helped Gateway join the CHAMPS School Sports and Fitness League for its junior high school students. Id. at ¶ 16. From 2004 to 2013, Plaintiff received year-end ratings of "satisfactory."

Approximately eight years after he joined Gateway, in May 2012, Defendant Judy Henry became the Principal. One month later, on June 2, 2012, Plaintiff emailed her to report dangerous conditions in the school gym. Id. at ¶ 18. Later that month, he applied to coach the school's PSAL soccer team. Id. at ¶ 22. Plaintiff claims that shortly after his complaint about the conditions in the gym, Henry called him in for a disciplinary conference and placed a disciplinary letter in his personnel file claiming that he had been insubordinate. Id. at ¶ 20. He also alleges that despite his qualifications and seniority rights pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") between the DOE and UFT, Henry rejected his application to coach the soccer team, causing the PSAL to shut the program down at the school. Id. at ¶ 22.

Plaintiff asserts that Henry's "campaign of harassment against him" then continued for four academic years (2012-2016). Id. at ¶ 21. Specifically, he claims that Henry subjected him to numerous unjust disciplinary conferences and placed unfounded disciplinary letters in his personnel file. Id. She also wrote allegedly false evaluations after observing Plaintiff's classes and denied his applications for per-session coaching positions. Id. Plaintiff further argues that Henry failed to provide reasonable accommodations for him despite knowing of his multiple knee surgeries, cancer diagnosis, and other physical ailments. Id. Finally, Plaintiff claims that despite having successfully grieved numerous disciplinary actions and unfounded teacher ratings issued against him, those actions and ratings are still reflected in his personnel file.

2012-2013 Academic Year

Plaintiff claims that Henry began harassing him at the very beginning of the 2012-2013 academic year, by delaying the start of the CHAMPS sports programs for three weeks. Id. at ¶ 23. Henry also made rude comments about Plaintiff's physical appearance³ and in response to Plaintiff's questions regarding the appropriateness of his class assignments for the year.⁴ Id. at ¶¶ 24-25. Plaintiff claims that in May 2013, Henry called Plaintiff to a meeting to inform him that he could not sit down during his classes. Id. at ¶ 26. Although Plaintiff explained that he sat because he had undergone three surgeries on his knee and suffered from back pain, Henryrefused to accommodate him. Id. at ¶ 26. Plaintiff filed at least three union grievances against Henry during the academic year, none of which Henry addressed. Id. at ¶ 27.

2013-2014 Academic School Year

Plaintiff alleges that the following academic year, he was selected by Gateway's staff to be on the School Leadership Team ("SLT"). Id. at ¶ 27. He claims that Henry was very hostile to him during SLT meetings and that he reported her alleged misconduct to the Special Commissioner of Investigation ("SCI"). Id. at ¶ 28. Plaintiff also claims that Henry denied his applications for coaching positions for both the CHAMPS and PSAL programs. Specifically, in September, Plaintiff was denied the CHAMPS fall coaching position, though he had retention rights pursuant to the UFT contract. Id. at ¶ 29. In November, Plaintiff was denied the PSAL varsity girls basketball coaching position, and the head and assistant coaching positions for the varsity indoor/outdoor track team. Id. at ¶ 32. Instead, Henry hired unlicensed and unqualified teachers and paraprofessionals. Id. at ¶ 43. Plaintiff filed a union grievance contesting Henry's denial of his CHAMPS fall coaching application. Id. at ¶ 29. Plaintiff was also subsequently denied the CHAMPS coaching position for the winter season - again, despite his contractual rights. Id. at ¶ 36. However, on March 18, 2014, after a grievance hearing, a representative from the Chancellor's Office of the DOE found that Henry's denial of Plaintiff's application for the CHAMPS coaching position was "illegal," and ordered Henry to allow Plaintiff to recover lost wages. Plaintiff was not paid until over a year later, in May 2015. Id. at ¶ 37.

Plaintiff further alleges that later that year, in October 2013, Henry scheduled a disciplinary conference in which she accused him of improperly organizing practices for the rugby team during the offseason and issued a disciplinary letter based on the accusation. Id. at ¶30. Plaintiff asserts that during the 2013-2014 academic year, Henry made numerous false accusations against Plaintiff resulting in at least thirteen disciplinary conferences and two disciplinary letters added to his file. Id. at ¶ 31. On December 16, 2013, Plaintiff filed a grievance against Henry for harassment. Id. at ¶ 33. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff received three disciplinary letters.⁵ Id. at ¶ 34. Henry also gave Plaintiff a rating of "ineffective" after a purported class observation in April, though Plaintiff claims that Henry did not actually observe his class. Id. at ¶ 39.

On May 19, 2014, during one of his classes, Plaintiff tripped on the gym floor, which was in a state of disrepair, and dislocated his toe. Id. at ¶ 40. He was immediately taken to the hospital and soon after, filed the paperwork for a line of duty injury. He alleges that he was not granted this status until approximately one month later. Id.

At the end of the school year, Henry gave Plaintiff an overall rating of "ineffective" for the 2013-2014 academic year. Id. at ¶ 41. Plaintiff appealed Henry's rating, but the DOE agreed to remove it before the appeal could be heard. The DOE also ordered Henry to remove the allegedly false observations of Plaintiff's class that she had filed in April.⁶ Id. at ¶ 63. Though the rating was removed the following school year, Plaintiff asserts that the false observations have yet to be removed. Id. at ¶ 41.

2014-2015 Academic Year

On September 3, 2014, Plaintiff was assigned a schedule that included a majority of classes outside of the areas in which was licensed to teach. Id. at ¶ 42. The classes also required Plaintiff to travel to five different classrooms, despite his physical limitations. Consequently, Plaintiff filed a reorganization grievance, which resulted in an order requiring Henry to change Plaintiff's schedule. Id. On November 17, Henry issued Plaintiff a memorandum stating that he was not permitted to sit during his lessons. Id. at ¶ 48. In response, Plaintiff gave Henry a doctor's note explaining that he could not stand for more than thirty minutes at a time due to his physical ailments. Id. During the school year, Plaintiff sent an email to Henry requesting an elevator key to facilitate his access to the various classrooms. He claims that Henry delayed granting his request for over a year. Id. at ¶ 57.

On December 9, 2014, Henry transferred all of the special education students from another physical education teacher's class to Plaintiff's class without giving Plaintiff the students' Individualized Education Plans ("IEP"). Id. at ¶ 50. Though Plaintiff requested the IEPs several times, his requests were ignored. Id. Plaintiff claims that Henry transferred the students to lower his Measure of Student Learning ("MOSL") rating score for the 2014-2015 school year.⁷ Id. at ¶¶ 50, 54. That same day, Henry observed Plaintiff's class. Though Plaintiff's lesson for the class required strict adherence to the DOE protocol for "fitnessgram testing," and he alleges that he followed the protocol, Henry rated his lesson as ineffective.Henry also reproached Plaintiff for sitting during the class. Id. at ¶ 51. Plaintiff successfully grieved the rating resulting in an order from the DOE directing Henry to remove the evaluation from Plaintiff's teaching file. Id. However, the evaluation still remains in Plaintiff's file. Id. On December 22, Plaintiff also filed a complaint with the New York State Education Department Office of Special Education ("NYSED") reporting Henry's violation of Special Education laws by failing to provide him with copies of the students' IEPs. The NYSED substantiated all of Plaintiff's...