UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No.: 

JUL 2 8 2020 

ANGELA E. NOBLE 

CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. 

S. D. OF FLA. - FT. PIERCE 

IRENEMIRAND, 

Plaintiff, Pro se, 

V 

WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESOR S, U.S., INC. 

Defendant. 

I ------------------- COMPLAINT 

Irene Mirand (Ms. Mirand) ("Plaintiff"), files this Complaint against Defendant, Walt 

Disney Parks and Resorts, U.S., Inc., (WDPR) ("Defendant") and states as follows: 

JURISDICTION 

1. Jurisdiction in this Court is proper as the claims are brought pursuant to the 

Chapter 760 of the Florida Civil Rights Act and Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act, 

Age Discrimination in Employment Act to recover unpaid back wages, actual, liquidated and 

punitive damages. 

2 The Jurisdiction of the Court over this controversy is based upon Federal Civil 

Rights Act. On July 25, 2020, Plaintiff, Irene Mirand, voluntarily dismissed without 

prejudice this ongoing case in the Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) case # 

20-2558 to where the case has been transferred from Florida Commission on Human Rights 

(FCHR) case# 2019-21649, following the initial filing at EEOC in August of 2019. 

2:20cv14265KMM

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 1 of 7
3. Venue is proper in this Court through Defendant's commission of unlawful 

policies and practices within this district and division. 

PARTIES 

4. At all times material hereto, Ms. Mirand was, and continues to be a resident of St 

Lucie County, Florida. 

5. At all times material hereto Defendant, WDPR was, and continues to be a Florida 

business. Further, at all times material hereto, Defendant, WDPR was, and continues to be, 

engaged in business in Indian River County, Florida. 

6. At all times material hereto Defendant was an employer, within an enterprise 

engaged in commerce, seeking and hiring employees, within the meaning of Chapter 760 of 

the Florida Civil Rights Act and Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act, Age 

Discrimination in Employment Act. 

7. Ms. Mirand has fulfiHed all conditions precedent to the institution of this action 

and/or such conditions ha e been waived. 

I. INTRODUCTION 

On or around December 22, 2018, Defendant, WDPR, posted a job opening for a 

position of a Financial Analyst, paying $75,000 annually. Ms. Mirand applied to the position 

with WDPR by submitting her resume to the Defendant through www.Ziprecruiter.com., a 

company that specialize in advertizing job postings on their electronic job board. 

On or around January 2019, Ms. Mirand was contacted by a WDPR representative, 

Judy Jankowski, a Disney recruiter. Ms. Jankowski conducted a lengthy, approximately 30 

minutes, initial phone interview where she told Ms. Mirand about the position, asked Ms. 

Mirand about her background, education and experience, her expectations about the job. Ms. 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 2 of 7
Jankowski told Ms. Mirand that once the initial interview is submitted to the decision 

makers, Ms. Miran.cl would be contacted if her qualifications matched the position to which 

Ms. Mirand had applied. Exhibit A. Ms. Mirand wanted to make sure that WDPR did not 

have anyone within the company qualifying for this position. Ms. Jankowski assured Ms. 

Mirand that they would have hired someone from within if that was the case, instead of 

wasting valuable resources on interviewing outside candidates as well as not wasting the 

candidate's time. 

The decision process must have been rigorous because WDPR waited a while to get 

back to Ms. Mirand. On January 30, 2019, Plaintiff received an email from Joanne Kwon, a 

higher up in the recruitment chain of command, notifying Ms. Mirand that she will be 

scheduling a 45 minute phone interview between Ms. Mirand and Dianne O'Neal, Manager 

of Finance at WDPR. Exhibit B. Ms. Kwon wanted to know Ms. Miran.d's availability. The 

phone interview with the Manager of Finance lasted approximately 45 minutes, where Ms. 

O'Neal asked Ms. Mirand about her background, education, qualifications, skills, etc. During 

the interview Ms. O'Neal told Ms. Mirand that she was a 30 year employee with Disney and 

knew all about the position for which Ms. Miran.cl applied and how it related to the whole of 

the organization. Ms. O'Neal was extremely happy with the interview and with Ms. Mirand's 

qualifications. She told Ms. Mirand that the company will take the manager's input into the 

recruitment process as the decision maker for hiring the right candidate. She also told Ms. 

Mirand that she will make sure that Ms. Miran.cl also speaks with Ms. Miran.d's direct 

manager, Ms. Tammy Gall, who was recently promoted to a Senior Financial Analyst. 

Before scheduling this interview, Ms. Miran.ct again asked a Disney higher up in the decision 

making process whether there was anyone within the company who would qualify for this 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 3 of 7
position. Again, she was assured by Ms. O'Neal that not only was there no one qualifying for 

the job but there was nobody ready to even be trained for the job. 

Ms. Kwon made another arrangement for Ms. Mirand to be interviewed, this time in 

perso~ by Ms. Gall at the job location at Disney World Resort in Vero Beach. Exhibit C. 

Ms. Mirand interviewed with Ms. Gall for approximately 15 minutes where Ms. Gall asked 

Ms. Mirand whether Ms. Mirand would be comfortable working in such a fast paced 

environment that is intended to promote innovation and change. She also asked Ms. Mirand 

whether Ms. Mirand would be comfortable with youth groups gathering and rehearsing right 

outside her office door. Ms. Gall said that this was just how Disney operated and that the 

company promoted a culture of youth to make their staff better able to relate to the younger 

customers' expectations. Ms. Gall thanked Ms. Mirand for her time and said that she will be 

in touch. Again, Ms. Mirand asked Ms. Gall if there was anyone from within the company 

who would qualify for the position. Ms. Gall said that there was no one and that there was 

not anyone even close to qualifying. 

On February 27, 2019, Ms. Mirand received a "do not reply" form email that notified 

Ms. Mirand that Disney is considering other candidates and to continue to apply to other 

positions at Disney. Exhibit D. Extremely distraught, Ms. Mirand called Ms. Gall who told 

Ms. Mirand that an employee from within the company, a much younger person who worked 

the front desk, was hired for the position of Financial Analyst. 

After that, Ms. Mirand applied to more than a dozen positions at Disney that matched 

her qualifications, however, she never received any response, not even a denial, like she 

never even existed. 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 4 of 7
II STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS 

A) Ms. Miran.d's qualifications, experience, education, skills etc directly related and fit 

perfectly with the position that was advertized by Disney. Considering that Disney 

does not even reply to those who do not qualify according to Ms. Mirand subsequent 

attempts at applying for other positions, the fact that Ms. Mirand was the front runner 

for the position is evident in that she was interviewed by the top brass with 30 years 

recruiting experience. 

B) Disney is well aware that discrimination on the basis of a candidate's age is against 

the law. Therefore, the phone interviews were conducted as though the candidate 

qualifies for the position based on age. However, the actual proof of age comes when 

an in person interview is conducted. Questions like ''would you be comfortable 

reporting to a much younger person?" or "are you aware that Disney promotes the 

culture of youth?" are only asked when the candidate seems to be over the desired age 

by Disney's standards. 

C) Disney no longer considers Ms. Mirand as a viable candidate based on her age and 

not on her qualifications. 

D) Disney hired an internal employee for this position who was much younger than Ms. 

Mirand and who had no qualifications or experience for the job of a Financial 

Analyst. 

E) Disney's Equal Employment Opportunity Flyer is nothing more than a platitude to 

hide behind, which, in fact, is not enough of a deterrent for Disney to conduct their 

discriminatory practices in violation of the Civil Rights Act. Exhibit E 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 5 of 7
F) Defendant has violated Chapter 760 of the Florida Civil Rights Act and Title VII of 

the Federal Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 

G) Documentation concerning the number of attempts by Plaintiff to apply to any other 

position within WDPR is in the possession and custody and control of Defendant. 

COUNTI 

VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 760 OF THE FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT AND 

TITLE VII OF THE FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, AGE DISCRIMINATION 

IN EMPLOYMENT ACT 

1. Plaintiff re-alleges and re-avers paragraphs 1 through 20 of the Complaint as 

if fully 

set forth herein. 

2. Plaintiff qualified for the position for which she interviewed. 

3. Plaintiff was not in the pool of potential candidates that WDPR keeps on file 

at all times for various positions, Ms. Mirand qualified and applied for a 

specific position. 

4. Plaintiff was specificaUy interviewed for this position by an increasingly 

senior staff. 

5. Plaintiff was denied the position due to her age, 62 years old. 

6. Plaintiff is no longer considered as a potential candidate for any position with 

WDPR due to her age, as no replies of any kind were addressed to Plaintiff 

when she applied to more than a dozen positions that specified her 

qualifications, education and experience. 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 6 of 7
7. Due to the intentional, willful, and unlawful acts of Defendant, Plaintiff 

suffered and continues to suffer damages and lost compensation plus 

liquidated damages. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully request that judgment be entered in 

her favor against Defendant: 

a. Declaring, pursuant to Chapter 760 of the Florida Civil Rights Act and 

Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in 

Employment Act, and that the acts and practices complained of herein are 

in violation. 

b. Awarding Plaintiff compensation in the amount due her for Plaintiff's time 

in denied salary and benefits. 

c. A warding Plaintiff liquidated damages in an amount equal to the denied 

salary and benefits. 

d. Awarding Plaintiff emotional and punitive damages due to mental anguish 

and Joss of dignity. 

e. Awarding Plaintiff pre-judgment interest; and 

f. Ordering any other further relief the Court deems just and proper. 

Respectfully submitted, 

dM~ 

Irene Mirand, 

P.O. Box 880584, 

Port St Lucie, FL 34988 

PH: 954-478-3267 

Email: irenemirandlO@gmail.com 

Case 2:20-cv-14265-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 7 of 7