Stevens v. The Bryn Mawr Tr. Co.

1

KAREN STEVENS, Plaintiff, v. THE BRYN MAWR TRUST COMPANY, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 19-2418

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

October 27, 2022

MEMORANDUM

Schiller, J.

Plaintiff Karen Stevens, a white woman, began working at The Bryn Mawr Trust Company (the “Bank” or “BMT”) in 1998 and was fired on June 6, 2019. The Bank terminated her for her alleged tardiness, failure to cooperate with her coworkers, and lack of cooperation scheduling times to work. Her “case is basically a retaliation case,” but she also asserts claims for race, sex, age, and wage discrimination. (Pl.'s Mem. of Law in Opp. to Def.'s Mot. for Summ. J. [Pl.'s Opp.] at 14; see also Am. Compl., ECF 2.) The Bank moves for summary judgment on all claims. For the reasons that follow, the Bank's motion is granted.

I. BACKGROUND

In 1998, the Bank hired Karen Stevens as a teller. (See Def.'s Statement of Undisputed Material Facts [Def.'s SUMF] ¶ 2; Pl.'s Statement of Disputed Facts in Opp to Def.'s SUFM [Pl.'s SDF in Opp.] ¶ 2.) Stevens worked part time at the Bank's Bryn Mawr branch typically for no more than thirty hours per week, but was contracted to work no more than forty hours per week. (See Def.'s SUMF ¶ 51; Def.'s Ex. 127; Pl.'s SDF in Opp. ¶ 51.) This flexible schedule allowed her to care for both her mother and sister, who suffered from a severe disability. (Stevens Dep. 124:23-125:18.) For example, Stevens did not work on Tuesdays and would later use this time to care for her family. (Id. 124:5-18) Stevens was talented at sales and the Bank gave her pay raises for her success. (See Id. 112:4-13; Def.'s SUMF ¶ 168.) By 2018, Stevens obtained the eighth-highest pay rate of all tellers at the Bank and the second-highest rate amongst part-time tellers. (Def.'s SUMF ¶¶ 7-19; Def.'s Ex. 138.) But despite her sales success, the Bank terminated Stevens on June 6, 2019 after repeated written warnings for tardiness, leaving early, and insubordination. (See Def.'s SUMF ¶¶ 3-6; Def.'s Exs. 126, 165, 166, 173, 218, 247; Pl.'s SDF in Opp. ¶ 6.)

A. Stevens's Allergies and the Bank's Accommodations

In 2010, Stevens told the Bank she had an allergy that required accommodation. (Def.'s SUMF ¶¶ 25-30; Stevens Dep. 10:21-11:15; Def.'s Exs. 54, 136.) She alerted the Bank's Human Resources Department that she could not tolerate the pungent smell of some perfumes, colognes, and aftershaves worn by her coworkers. (Id.) These odors caused her difficulty breathing. (Stevens Dep. 11:23-12:4; Def.'s Ex. 54.) The allergy generated friction between Stevens and her coworkers, specifically Michael Dougherty. (Stevens Dep. 11:20-24; Def.'s Ex. 55.) Nancy Pinkowicz, a human resources employee, investigated Stevens's complaints about the friction and held a large meeting about perfume and cologne usage that “embarasse[ed]” Stevens. (Stevens Dep. 11:23-12:21; Pl.'s SDF ¶ 21.) Although embarrassed, Stevens did not believe the Bank's management was harassing employees about perfume. (Stevens Dep. 13:14-16.)

The Bank accommodated her by asking all employees working near Stevens to not use colognes, providing Stevens a fan to disperse any odors, and moving her to an open-area work space. (Def.'s SUMF ¶ 27; Def. Ex. 54.) Pinkowicz and another employee then instructed Stevens to refrain from directly speaking to any employee if she had a concern with his or her cologne or perfume. (Stevens Dep. 13:17-14:12, 15:17-17:17; Def.'s Ex. 54.) Rather, Pinkowicz instructed Stevens to register any concern with her direct supervisor. (Stevens Dep. 16:5-19; Def.'s Ex. 54.) On May 4, 2011, Bank managers hosted a meeting with Stevens, where they told her the Bank had made all possible accommodations for her allergy and she could not have “any outbursts of any sorts or send emails that are demanding/threatening.” (Def.'s Ex. 55; see also Def.'s SUMF at ¶ 30.) Stevens did not sign the memorandum memorializing this discussion. (Def.'s Ex. 55.)

B. Wandrea Russo and the Bank's 2018 Investigation

Stevens was friends with her manager, Wandrea Russo, an African American head teller at the Bryn Mawr branch (Russo Dep. 297:16-17; Stevens Dep. 123:21-24.) Russo levied harassment claims at the Bank, prompting the Bank to launch an internal investigation of her claims in 2018. (Def.'s SUMF ¶ 36; Pl.'s SDF in Opp. ¶ 4.) As part of the investigation, human resources employees Nicola Fryer and Jennifer Stryker met with Stevens on June 4, 2018. (Stevens Dep. 106:5-106:23; Pl.'s SDF in Opp. ¶ 41, Def.'s Ex. 103.)

During the meeting, Fryer and Stryker asked Stevens if she had ever heard any racially offensive comments while working at the Bank. (Def.'s Ex. 103.) Stevens recounted overhearing an offensive comment about a fellow Bank employee. (Stevens Dep. 85:18-86:5; 167:6-18; Def.'s Ex. 103.) She said she was offended when Therese Trainer, a Bank employee, told Richard Rose, an African American Bank teller, to go quickly to the Bank's vault and get a logbook because he was Jamaican and Jamaicans are supposed to be fast. (Stevens Dep. 36:1-17, 114:8-9; Pl.'s SDF in Opp. ¶¶ 41-42; Pl.'s Opp. at 2; Def.'s Exs. 103, 111A.)) Stevens told Rose to file a report because she believed the comment to be harassment. (Def.'s Ex. 103.) Stevens also referenced a time when Trainer called Russo and another African American employee “liars” and made Russo perform additional tasks although others were available. (Stevens Dep. 67:10-12; Pl.'s Statement of Disputed Facts [SDF] ¶ 25; Def.'s Ex. 103). She believed this to be racially charged. Stevens said she also had heard a comment secondhand concerning slavery. (Def.'s Ex. 103.)

Stevens told Fryer and Stryker about additional offensive comments that were directed towards her. She mentioned Trainer's comments that Stevens needed to color her hair and was clumsy. (Stevens Dep. 119:6-12, 121:11-24; Def.'s Ex. 103.) She also mentioned instances where Trainer yelled at her. (Def.'s Ex. 103.) Stevens also raised Trainer's continued use of perfume when working near her despite the Bank's instruction prohibiting it. (Stevens Dep. 119:6-12; Def.'s Ex. 103.)0F^[1]

After the interview, Stevens continued a dialogue with Fryer to discuss Trainer's behavior. (Stevens Dep. 122:1-6.) Stevens claims Fryer told her that, as her manager, Trainer could take away her days off and give her more work if Stevens complained.1F^[2] (Id.; id. at 125:3-8) Fryer's remarks worried Stevens because she was her mother and sister's caretaker. (Id. at 125:9-13.)

C. Stevens's Interactions with Cindy Yovanov

In July 2018, Cindy Yovanov replaced Trainer as the Bryn Mawr branch's manager (Stevens Dep. 27:18-22; Def.'s SUMF ¶ 51; Pl.'s SDF ¶ 8.) When Yovanov and Stevens first met in July 2018, Stevens made it known she was to work no more than thirty hours a week due to her caretaking responsibilities, her work arrangement since she started at the Bank in 1998. (Stevens Dep. 233:8-20.) Importantly, Stevens's sister passed away from lung cancer in June 2018-only one month before Yovanov started at the Bryn Mawr branch. (Id. 240:1-4; Pl.'s SDF ¶ 15.) As Stevens and her family mourned, her mother's health also deteriorated. (Id.; Stevens Dep. 222:1517.) Stevens explained her emotionally taxing and time-demanding circumstances to Yovanov. (Id. 232:18-233:7.)

Nevertheless, Yovanov gave Stevens additional responsibilities because she believed Stevens was not doing her fair share of work. (Def.'s Mot. for Summ. J at 3.). For the first time in her twenty years at the Bank, Stevens was asked to open the Bryn Mawr branch in the morning. (Russo Dep. 280:11-18, Def. Exs. 128, 132.) Stevens refused and explained to Russo it did not work with her caretaking responsibilities. (Russo Dep. 281:2-12.) But Russo put Stevens-like all other tellers-on the opening schedule upon the order of “management.” (Id. 281:13-23.) Yovanov, Russo, or other managers also asked Stevens to assist with end of day duties, but Stevens refused. (Def.'s Exs. 127, 132.) Stevens was not trained how to balance the ATM and resisted changes to her work schedule (Stevens Dep. 251:7-252:24; Russo Dep. 279:17-280-5, Def.'s Exs. 129, 132, 143.) Her demands made scheduling other tellers more challenging. (Russo Dep. 280:610.)

On July 25, 2018, Stevens showed up late to a meeting due to an emergency with her mother. (Stevens Dep. 242:12-20, 243:7-18; Pl.'s SDF ¶ 16; Def. Ex. 127.) As a result, Yovanov wrote Stevens a disciplinary memorandum that day.2F^[3] (See Def.'s Ex. 127.) The memo summarized the interactions described above as well as other incidents. (Id; see also Pl.'s SDF ¶ 17). Yovanov wrote that Stevens had “not shown a willingness to learn new skills” and had “shown a lack of cooperation.” (Def.'s Ex. 127.) The memo concluded with an action plan, stating that “[i]f the organization experiences continued situations involving similar behavior, it will result in additional corrective counseling, up to and including termination.” (Id.) The memo upset Stevens. (Stevens Dep. 248:16-24.) After receiving it, Stevens repeatedly tried to text Russo to discuss it. (Id. 247:2-4; Def.'s Ex. 132.) Two days after receiving the memo, Stevens approached Yovanov in tears and suggested she may not come into work next week and quit. (Id.)3F^[4]

When Stevens continued to reject additional responsibility Yovanov gave her a final written warning for tardiness and unwillingness to cooperate on October 5, 2018. (See Def.'s Ex. 165.) Yovanov issued the final warning after Stevens did not assist with a bank project involving the safety deposit boxes. (Def.'s Exs. 163, 164, 166; Pl.'s SDF ¶ 19.) Stevens claims she did help on the project but hurt her wrist or hand and told her coworker she could no longer help and would try next week. (Def.'s Exs. 163, 164,...