In Grazette v. Manpower et al, 21-CV-4296 (LTS), 2022 WL 1556192 (S.D.N.Y. May 16, 2022), the court dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims as insufficiently alleged.
From the decision:
At the pleading stage in an employment discrimination action, “a plaintiff must plausibly allege that (1) the employer took adverse employment action against him, and (2) [a protected trait, such as his race, color, sex, age, or disability] was a motivating factor in the employment decision.” Vega v. Hempstead Union Free Sch. Dist., 801 F.3d 72, 86 (2d Cir. 2015). As to the second element, a plaintiff alleging age discrimination must also allege “that the relevant protected trait – […] – ‘was the ‘but-for’ cause of the employer’s adverse action.’ ” Mazzeo v. Mnuchin, 751 Fed. Appx. 13, 14 (2d Cir. 2018) (quotation omitted). The plaintiff may state a claim by “alleging facts that directly show discrimination or facts that indirectly show discrimination by giving rise to a plausible inference of discrimination.” Vega, 801 F.3d at 87.
The federal antidiscrimination statutes prohibit employers from mistreating an individual because of the individual’s protected characteristics, Patane v. Clark, 508 F.3d 106, 112 (2d Cir. 2007), or retaliating against an employee who has opposed any practice made unlawful by those statutes, see Crawford v. Metro. Gov’t, 555 U.S. 271, 276 (2009) (holding that conduct is protected when it “confront[s],” “resist[s],” or “withstand[s]” unlawful actions). Mistreatment at work that occurs for a reason other than an employee’s protected characteristic or opposition to unlawful discriminatory conduct, however, is not actionable under these statutes. See Chukwuka v. City of New York, 513 F. App’x 34, 36 (2d Cir. 2013) (quoting Brown v. Henderson, 257 F.3d 246, 252 (2d Cir. 2001)).
Plaintiff’s complaint is short and plain, but it does not show that he is entitled to relief. Plaintiff does not allege facts showing that Defendants’ actions were based on any federally protected characteristics. Plaintiff does not identify his race or any other characteristics that are protected under federal law. The Court is therefore unable to determine whether Plaintiff is entitled to relief. The Court will give Plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint to allege facts showing that his employment claim arises from alleged discrimination based on his race, sex, age, disability, or other characteristics that are protected by federal law.
The court did, however, give plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint, noting that plaintiff’s amended complaint should tell the Court “who violated his federally protected rights and how; when and where such violations occurred; and why Plaintiff is entitled to relief.”