Martone v. Jet Aviation Flight Servs.

KATHRYN MARTONE, Plaintiff, v. JET AVIATION FLIGHT SERVICES, INC., RUSSELL OKRENT,LEON BLACK, AND DEBRA BLACK, Defendants.

Case No. 2:19-cv-21011 (BRM) (ESK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

April 26, 2021

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

MARTINOTTI, DISTRICT JUDGE

Before this Court is a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35) filed by Defendants Jet Aviation Flights Services, Inc. ("JAFS"), Russell Okrent ("Okrent"), and Leon Black and Debra Black (the "Blacks") (collectively, "Defendants") seeking to dismiss Plaintiff Kathryn Martone's ("Plaintiff") Amended Complaint ("Amended Complaint" or "Am. Compl.") pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff opposes the motion. (ECF No. 36.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b), this Court did not hear oral argument. For the reasons set forth herein and for good cause shown, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35) is DENIED.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY¹

In considering this Motion to Dismiss, the Court accepts the factual allegations in the Amended Complaint as true and draws all inferences in the light most favorable to Plaintiff. See Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 228 (3d Cir. 2008).

This matter stems from the termination of Plaintiff, a Cabin Safety Attendant, from JAFS, a private airline company that provides charter services for private business aircrafts, for alleged retaliation for reporting unsafe operational and workplace safety practices as well as unlawful discrimination and harassment. Plaintiff alleges the Blacks were decision-makers with respect to hiring and firing, and JAFS and the Blacks, at all relevant times, employed more than fifteen employees, including Plaintiff. (See ECF No. 32 ¶¶ 19, 22.)

Plaintiff was hired by JAFS and the Blacks in or about May 2018. (Id. ¶¶ 27, 29.)² As a Cabin Safety Attendant, Plaintiff worked with the flight crew or "team" to ensure passenger safety and comfort on flights. (Id. ¶ 29.) Plaintiff excelled at her position, received substantial praise from crew and clients, and was informed numerous times by Lead Captain Chris Mihok ("Mihok") that she was doing "a great job." (Id. ¶ 33.) Moreover, Plaintiff had never received any negative evaluations or reports on her job performance. (Id. ¶ 34.)

Throughout her employment with JAFS and the Blacks, Plaintiff was "consistently treated differently, yelled at, verbally abused, and disrespected on the basis of her sex." (Id. ¶ 35.) The other three members of Plaintiff's team, all of whom were male, were not treated in the same"negative, abusive and disrespectful matter" as Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 36.) In particular, Okrent, a JAFS pilot on Plaintiff's team, consistently "singled out" Plaintiff by subjecting her to verbal abuse and harassment on a daily basis. (Id. ¶ 37.) Okrent also made negative comments or jokes about women, including: (1) where a woman's "proper place" was; (2) that older, specifically female, flight attendants were "useless"; and (3) sexually graphic comments like "I feel like I was rode hard and put away wet," after almost every long flight. (Id. ¶¶ 41, 42, 44.)³ When Plaintiff voiced her concerns about these comments to Mihok in front of Okrent, Okrent told Plaintiff to "chill out." (Id. ¶ 44.) Further, if Plaintiff attempted to reference the size of something using her hands, for example, to indicate a small amount, Mihok would say, "you can't do that in front of a man, we are sensitize to size." (Id. ¶ 45.) Plaintiff alleges sexual comments "were made on every, or nearly every trip" Plaintiff worked on with JAFS. (Id. ¶ 46.)

In addition to "numerous instances of harassment and discrimination on the basis of her sex," Plaintiff, who was appointed Safety Representative by Matt Feinstein ("Feinstein"), a JAFS Safety Officer, consistently sought and requested operational safety procedures and protocols for the safety of passengers and crew, but her requests were "ignored or dismissed" or ridiculed. (Id. ¶¶ 48-49.) The Flights Operations Manual Section 5.3.3 ("Operations Manual") states what information should be reviewed before each flight. (Id. ¶ 51.) Her repeated requests for safety briefings, which were intended to ensure crew and passenger safety and help the pilots understand the desired sequence of events and action, were often ignored or met with "scorn and annoyance." (Id. ¶¶ 53, 55.) For example, when Plaintiff made requests for weather and turbulence prediction reports, Okrent would generally respond by "laughing, sighing, or making inappropriatecomments." (Id. ¶ 56.) On one occasion, in response to a request for a weather report, Okrent replied "I don't know and I don't care," and stated he "didn't even look at [weather reports]." (Id. ¶¶ 57-58.)⁴ Plaintiff, believing Defendants, and in particular Okrent's "blatant lack of interest in aviation safety" was "in violation of a law or rule or public regulation . . . [or] . . . public policy," brought her concerns to Mihok. (Id. ¶ 60.)⁵ In response, Mihok noted Okrent apologized and asked Plaintiff "what more" she wanted, "implying that her valid safety concerns and requests to follow proper procedures were unimportant and bothersome." (Id. ¶ 62.) In another incident, Plaintiff messaged Mihok about a flight in which Okrent turned off all cabin power and lights thereby creating a potential safety hazard. (Id. ¶ 64.) When Plaintiff asked Okrent what happened with the loss of power and lights, Okrent responded, "I pushed a wrong button, leave me alone." (Id. ¶ 65.) Plaintiff also requested to Mihok and another crew member, Ben Robertson, that she be kept informed of all information and developments relating to a flight but received no response. (Id. ¶ 67.) When Plaintiff complained to Mihok about sex discrimination and harassment and her concerns that Defendants were in violation of a law, regulation, or public policy as a result of, among other things, Defendants' "failure to provide weather/turbulence reports and crew briefings," Plaintiff was told to "let it go." (Id. ¶¶ 70-71.)

Following her complaints to Mihok, the team continued to harass Plaintiff and dismiss her safety concerns and attempts to follow regulation and procedure. (Id. ¶ 72.) Accordingly, on August 23, 2019, Plaintiff reported her concerns to a new supervisor, Cabin Attendant SupervisorDani Mickel ("Mickel"). (Id. ¶ 73.) Mickel "made an excuse" for every incident of discrimination, harassment, and Defendants' dismissal of her attempts to ensure proper safety in the aircraft, and Plaintiff was again told to "let it go." (Id. ¶¶ 75-76.) Thereafter, Plaintiff contacted Courtney Mazzola of Human Resources ("Mazzola") and informed Mazzola that neither Mihok nor Mickel took her complaints about discrimination and harassment or workplace safety seriously. (Id. ¶ 77.) Plaintiff also requested a meeting with all the pilots to discuss her concerns, which never happened. (Id. ¶ 78.)⁶

On September 6, 2019, Plaintiff sent an email to all three pilots on her crew officially requesting crew briefings in accordance with the Operations Manual. (Id. ¶ 80.) In the email, Plaintiff wrote:

Hey guys, going forward on all trips I would like to have full crew briefing[s] at some point during our [pre-departure] duties as it states in our Flight Operation Manual. (section 5.3.3). [It's] really important to me for good [crew resource management], as well as being important to the safety of the passengers and all crew.

(Id.) On the next trip, scheduled for September 14, 2019, Plaintiff discovered the aircraft was broken which would delay departure. (Id. ¶ 81.) She learned all the male members of her crew were aware of the delay but had not informed her. (Id.) On the following trip on September 17, 2019, Okrent approached Plaintiff as she was checking into a hotel and pulled her to the side. (Id. ¶ 83.) Okrent mocked Plaintiff's September 6, 2019 email and informed her he did not appreciate her complaints about him to JAFS and Human Resources. (Id. ¶ 86.) Plaintiff informed Okrent she had tried communicating her complaints to Okrent directly but he either ignored her or criticized her. (Id. ¶ 87.) At some point, the conversation between Plaintiff and Okrent escalated and a hotelmanager approached them and requested they "take their conversation elsewhere." (Id. ¶ 92.) Plaintiff "extricated herself" to go to her hotel room and texted Okrent to inform him she would no longer have any non-work-related conversations with him, and any issues between them should be discussed at the upcoming meeting Plaintiff previously requested. (Id. ¶ 93.) Plaintiff also immediately contacted Human Resources concerning the confrontation in the hotel lobby. (Id. ¶ 94.) Plaintiff further commented to Human Resources she had been "complaining for months about sex discrimination, sexual harassment and violations of what she believed to be laws regulations or safety issues" but was ignored by JAFS and her crew. (Id. ¶ 96.)

Later that day, Plaintiff's supervisor escorted her to meet with Mazzola and an account manager. (Id. ¶ 98.) At this meeting, Plaintiff was told she was being "grounded" for her "aggressive behavior" involving Okrent in the hotel lobby. (Id. ¶ 99.) While Plaintiff tried to explain "the reality of the situation," namely that despite "repeatedly stating that their issues should be discussed at a proper meeting," Okrent "cornered her" for purposes of harassing and verbally abusing her. (Id. ¶ 100.) Mazzola "ignored" Plaintiff's version of the incident and told Plaintiff she would not be on the next trip and was not to contact the Blacks concerning the situation. (Id. ¶ 101.) Plaintiff inquired as to whether Okrent was being "grounded" and was told he was. (Id. ¶ 102.) Plaintiff also alleges, on September 5, 2019, significantly prior to her interaction with Okrent, but after Plaintiff made repeated complaints, Plaintiff learned she had been removed from a trip scheduled for September 8, 2019. (See id. ...