On October 7, 2024, The Law Office of David H. Rosenberg, P.C. (“Firm”) filed a verified complaint of disability, discrimination, and retaliation with The New York State Division of Human Rights against Fred David International U.S.A., Inc. d/b/a Fred David Como (“Fred David”), Heather Nau, an individual (“Nau”), and Lianne Sylvestre, an individual (“Sylvestre”), and together as “Respondents”, for unlawful discriminatory practices relating to employment in violation of Article 15 of the Executive Law of the State of New York (Human Rights Law).
According to the verified complaint, Complainant was a clothing designer well-liked by co-workers and customers.
During the early morning hours of August 7, 2024, a Wednesday, Complainant informed Sylvestre, Nau, and office manager Jayme Udashkin (all together as “Group”) that he was admitted to NYU Langone Hospital (“NYU Langone”) due to his stress and anxiety disorder. Complainant provided a letter on NYU Langone letterhead from his private doctor who advised that Complainant “was seen and treated in our emergency department on August 7, 2024” and may return to work on 08/09/2024”, that Friday. The letter further advised, “If you have any questions or concerns, please don’t hesitate to call.”
At 1:55 p.m., Nau responded to Complainant by CC’ing the Group, “Hope you feel better soon.”
At 10:13 p.m., Complainant responded to the Group politely, reminding that he would be out of work until Friday as per his doctor’s orders.
On August 8, 2024, Nau emailed the Group in response, “that would have been good info to know yesterday.” However, Nau had received Dr. Schaeffer’s letter “yesterday” indicating that Complainant would be out of work until Friday, August 9, 2024.
Nau tried to gaslight Complainant into believing, “Your health is the number one priority” and sought to find a reason to terminate Complainant because of the disability, writing, “I would like to speak with you today on work-related info, we are up against a very tight deadline. I will need to understand some things regarding Costco. Please let me know a good time this am. Thanks.”
Sylvestre tried to mask Nau’s retaliation with her own efforts to gaslight Complainant into believing she cared about his health, “Please take today and rest, let’s plan to speak around 10 or 11 a.m. tomorrow when you are more rested.” Other non-disabled people were not treated this way.
On August 8, 2024, Complainant emailed the Group with a letter from his private therapist, David Fergusson (“Fergusson”), who wrote on official therapist letterhead:
To Whom It May Concern: I’ve been [Complainant’s] psychotherapist for the past number of years. Although he functions at a high level, [he] suffers from depression and anxiety. He has been able [to] manage his conditions quite well. However, this past week, he suffered a major anxiety attack which resulted in a hospital visit. He was treated there and is currently in consultation with me and a psychiatrist. We are currently evaluating him in order to discover the cause of this episode. It is my considered opinion that in order to recover and return to his previous level of functioning, [he] should be allowed to work from home until this episode is fully resolved. It is felt that by working at home, [he] will have the opportunity to reduce his stress level and return to his baseline functioning. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by phone or email.
On August 9, 2024, Sylvestre canceled the meeting and apologized for doing so.
On August 30, 2024, the Friday of Labor Day weekend, Complainant submitted a second letter from Fergusson:
On August 8, 2024, I made a request to the HR department that [Complainant] be allowed to work from home until he was able to recover and return to his former level of functioning following a serious anxiety/panic attack. It is my clinical opinion that allowing [him] to work on a hybrid schedule will reduce the stress that led to the anxiety attack in August. He responded well to the week that he was able to work at home and I think that a hybrid schedule will be helpful to [him] in functioning at his usual high level. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Please let me know if you have any questions.
In response, Nau wrote to the Group “we should definitely talk Tuesday am.” Even though Complainant had just made a reasonable accommodation request to work from home, Nau wrote, “Let me know once you are in the office Tuesday am and we can connect.” Thus, the reasonable accommodation request was not granted.
On September 4, 2024, one day after the return from Labor Day weekend, Complainant was terminated on account of disability and in retaliation for his reasonable accommodation requests.
The Firm is seeking the reinstatement of Complainant, together with a cease and desist order restraining Respondents from unlawful discriminatory and retaliatory conduct, as well as compensatory, emotional, and punitive damages; and maximum civil fines and penalties.