Michel v. Nat'l Grid U.S. Serv. Co.

FRANTZ MICHEL, Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL GRID USA SERVICE COMPANY, INC., Defendant.

Civil Action No. 17-11099-LTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

November 30, 2020

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

[Docket No. 106]

Boal, M.J.

Pro se plaintiff Frantz Michel¹ alleges that defendant National Grid USA Service Company, Inc. ("National Grid") discriminated against him on the basis of a disability, his race, and his national origin in violation of Massachusetts law. He also alleges violations of the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 ("FMLA"). In addition, he alleges that National Grid retaliated against him in violation of Massachusetts law and the FMLA. National Grid has moved for summary judgment on all of Michel's claims. Docket No. 106.²,³ I heard oralargument on November 18, 2020. For the following reasons, I recommend that Judge Sorokin grant in part and deny in part the motion.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Michel filed his complaint in Massachusetts Superior Court on April 26, 2017. See Docket No. 9 at 6. National Grid removed the case to this Court on June 14, 2017. Docket No. 1.

On June 30, 2020, National Grid filed the instant motion for summary judgment. Docket No. 106. On July 21, 2020, Michel filed his response. Docket No. 116. National Grid filed a reply on August 3, 2020. Docket No. 117.

Michel failed to file a response to National Grid's Rule 56.1 Statement of Undisputed Facts. Because he is proceeding pro se, I allowed him an opportunity to file a response that complied with both Local Rule 56.1 and this Court's Scheduling Orders (Docket Nos. 99, 104). See Docket No. 118. Michel was specifically warned that failure to comply "may result in the Court deeming the Defendant's Statement of Facts admitted for purposes of the motion for summary judgment." See id.

On September 4, 2020, Michel filed a Separate Statement of Items in Dispute Filed Concurrently With His Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Docket No. 119-1. He only disputed 12 of National Grid's 89 statements of fact. He also refiled his opposition to National Grid's motion for summary judgment and his affidavit.⁴ Docket No. 119-2; Docket No. 120. On September 16, 2020, National Grid filed a Reply in Further Support of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, responding to Michel's September 4, 2020 filing. Docket No. 121.

II. FACTS⁵

A. Relevant Company Background

National Grid is one of the largest investor-owned energy companies in the United States.⁶ It provides electricity and natural gas services to more than 20 million customers throughout Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York.⁷

National Grid divides its employees among the "gas group" and the "electric group."⁸ It is not uncommon for employees to transfer internally from one group to the other, as appropriate opportunities become available.⁹ Although the hierarchical structure has changed somewhatthroughout the years, over the last decade, there have been various tiers of Project Managers (e.g., Associate Project Manager, Lead Project Manager).¹⁰ Leadership in the project management sphere is made up of managers and directors.¹¹ Whereas project managers are responsible for discrete projects, managers and directors are responsible for overseeing, supporting, and delegating.¹²

For purposes of promotion consideration, National Grid reviews each internal candidate's education level, qualifications, and prior work history.¹³ National Grid maintains regimented mechanisms for internal promotions.¹⁴ As a general practice, National Grid places specific emphasis on individuals' performance at National Grid (as opposed to their background outside of the Company) when considering whether to award a specific promotion.¹⁵ National Grid rarely, if ever, promotes employees more than one level in one move.¹⁶

B. Michel

Michel is Black.¹⁷ He was born in Haiti.¹⁸ While he speaks English well, he has a heavyaccent.¹⁹ Michel suffers from severe acute myopia.²⁰ He has received treatment for this condition, including several surgeries.²¹ He has also received treatment for a retinal detachment.²² In addition, Michel suffers from chronic back pain.²³

C. Michel's Employment At National Grid

National Grid hired Michel in October 2008 as a project manager in the New England Distribution Project Management Department.²⁴ As a project manager, Michel was responsible for managing specific projects for National Grid customers in New England in order to ensure that the projects were completed on a timely basis, on budget, and in a safe manner.²⁵

National Grid alleges that, from 2008 through 2014, Michel's performance remained mostly stagnant, with no serious cause for concern.²⁶ It maintains, however, that there were some early, but minor, warning signs of performance deficiencies, which would become more pronounced later on.²⁷ For example, in his first year-end review (for the end of 2008 and 2009),Daniel Glenning, Michel's then-supervisor, noted that Michel had failed to consistently demonstrate an ability to build relationships with his colleagues.²⁸ Internal relationship building was especially important in project management at National Grid because alignment and collaboration among team members is required in order to identify and focus on customers' specific needs and wants.²⁹

National Grid alleges that Glenning attempted to coach Michel with respect to another performance problem he had observed: Michel's poor communication skills.³⁰ Michel denies that he ever received any coaching from Glenning. Rather, he maintains that he often complained to National Grid's Human Resources Department that Glenning neglected to provide any guidance.³¹ According to Michel, performance review sessions with Glenning never lasted more than five minutes.³² Those meetings consisted of no other agenda or purpose aside from Glenning informing Michel of his new pay rate.³³ Glenning always told Michel that his performance was fine.³⁴

According to National Grid, Michel's performance issues arising from his weaknesses in relationship building and communication, though somewhat concerning, were not particularly pronounced in his role as project manager, because he had no supervisory responsibilities andless accountability than a manager or director level employee would have had.³⁵ As a result, Michel's performance as a project manager remained largely up to National Grid's standards for the next several years.³⁶

Throughout his tenure at National Grid, Michel applied for and received several different positions, leading to placements on a variety of teams (both within the gas group and the electric group), and with several different supervisors.³⁷ He worked sufficiently well as a project manager and demonstrated good technical skills, but did not exhibit any of the specific strengths or skill sets that National Grid looks for in manager or director-level employees, such as demonstrated appreciation for the bigger picture, strong team ethic, leadership, and good communication skills.³⁸

In late 2013, Michel began reporting directly to Timothy Moore, who is Black.³⁹ Moore has been employed by National Grid since 2005.⁴⁰ In 2013, when Moore became Michel's direct supervisor, he was a manager of project management in the electric group.⁴¹ Michel worked under Moore's direction for approximately six months, during the first half of 2014.⁴² During this time, Moore recommended Michel to manage a very high profile and important gasliquefier project.⁴³ Michel took on this new responsibility and continued to perform adequately his job as project manager.⁴⁴

In July 2014, National Grid hired Cedric Williams, who is Black, as a new Vice President.⁴⁵ Williams was tasked with starting the Project Management and Complex Construction group.⁴⁶

In early 2015, Michel applied for a director role within that group, which would have been a jump two levels upward.⁴⁷ Williams invited Michel to interview for a manager position instead of the director role.⁴⁸ Following the interview, Williams promoted Michel to Manager of Project Management, effective February 1, 2015.⁴⁹ As manager of project management, Michel was given significantly increased responsibility (with a corresponding salary increase⁵⁰), and he was initially assigned one direct report.⁵¹

Williams continued to interview candidates for the director position, which would beresponsible for directly overseeing Michel's role and the rest of project management.⁵² Williams eventually hired Moore to fill the director position.⁵³ As director, Moore became responsible for two direct reports, Michel and another manager of project management, as well as all of their direct reports.⁵⁴ Moore had very high expectations and was a results-driven supervisor.⁵⁵

During and immediately after the formation of the new Project Management and Complex Construction group, National Grid employees became aware of an impending company-wide hiring freeze.⁵⁶ As a result, Michel needed to act quickly to hire new project managers.⁵⁷ Instead, Michel drafted a complicated and multi-step hiring plan, which he sent to Moore. Notwithstanding Michel's awareness that he needed to hire project managers quickly due to the impending hiring freeze, his plan did not project any actual hires until months later.⁵⁸ Moore felt that Michel's hiring plan was too "elaborate" and "detailed."⁵⁹ Given the time constraints, Moore expected Michel to have initiated a direct conversation about hiring, instead of taking time away from his already busy schedule to craft an unnecessary and lengthy written plan.⁶⁰

Notwithstanding the hiring plan, Michel failed to identify and hire candidates to join his team.⁶¹ He hedged on acceptable candidates, and drew out the hiring process unnecessarily.⁶² As a result, Michel was unable to make any new hires before the hiring freeze went into effect.⁶³

Michel immediately began to struggle with his new, increased level of responsibility.⁶⁴ His new duties pivoted...