Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 1 of 30

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No: 

STEFANO FRANCILLON, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

MAPEI CORPORATION, 

a foreign corporation, 

Defendant. 

___________________/ 

COMPLAINT 

 COMES NOW, Plaintiff STEFANO FRANCILLON, (herein referred to as “Plaintiff”) 

by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby files this complaint against Defendant, MAPEI 

CORPORATION, a foreign corporation and declares and avers as follows: 

VENUE AND JURISDICTION 

1. Plaintiff brings a claim for discriminatory and retaliatory treatment and seeks relief 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981, §1981(a), et seq. 

2. Defendant MAPEI CORPORATION (herein referred to as “MAPEI” or 

“Defendant”) is an Illinois corporation headquartered at 1144 East Newport Center Drive, Deerfield 

Beach, Florida 33442. 

3. Venue is proper in Broward County, Florida, insofar as the Defendant operates in 

Broward County, Florida and Plaintiff worked for Defendant in Broward County, Florida. 

Defendant is within the jurisdiction of this Court. 

4. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Broward County and at all times worked for 

Defendant at its location in Broward County, Florida. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 1 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 2 of 30

5. This Court has federal question jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s discrimination and 

retaliation claims in this matter insofar as the matter involves a violation of 42 U.S.C. §1981, 

§1981(a), et seq. 

COMMON ALLEGATIONS 

6. Plaintiff is an African American male with Haitian roots, who began working for 

Defendant at Defendant’s Deerfield Beach, Florida location on or about June 16, 2014 as a 

Corporate HR Coordinator. 

7. Plaintiff is well educated with a Bachelor’s degree from Florida Atlantic University 

(FAU) in Boca Raton, Florida in 2011, and a Master’s Degree in Public Administration (M.P.A.) 

from FAU in Boca Raton, Florida in 2013. 

8. While performing his duties as a Corporate HR Coordinator, Plaintiff also 

performed recruiting duties, such as recruiting, interviewing, pre-screening, conducting new hire 

orientations for all corporate employees, maintaining all external and internal trainings, 

maintaining all organizational charts for MAPEI Americas, revamped Exit Interview Guide, and 

was responsible for the educational encouragement program. Plaintiff also managed the Gas Card 

Program for all sales representatives, and the Second Language Program at the corporate office. 

Plaintiff created and maintained job descriptions and Requests for Resources. 

9. Under supervisors Vickie Brint, Adebola Morton, and Joan Stout, Plaintiff received 

positive performance reviews and positive performance evaluations. Because of Plaintiff’s 

excellent performance, another HR supervisor, Elsa Villanueva, asked Plaintiff to work for her. 

10. On or about March 23, 2015, Zaharoula Nativi became Plaintiff’s supervisor. 

11. On or about May 16, 2016, Carlo Amato became the new HR Director. Plaintiff 

shared with Amato that his goals were to become a recruiter and grow with the company. Plaintiff 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 2 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 3 of 30

also shared his goals with other supervisors, and it became common knowledge that Plaintiff’s 

goals were to become a recruiter for Defendant. 

12. Plaintiff married in June of 2016. Upon his return from his honeymoon, on or about 

June 24, 2016, Nativi informed Plaintiff that Defendant was creating a Senior Staffing Specialist 

position which was a recruiting position and building a recruiting team. Plaintiff reacted with great 

excitement over the new team. 

13. Nativi quickly squelched Plaintiff’s excitement by stating the only reason she told 

Plaintiff about the new position and team was that he was going to see the posting. Despite the fact 

Plaintiff had by this time been performing recruiting duties for over the past year, and held a 

Master’s Degree in Public Administration, Nativi went on to tell him he was not qualified to apply 

because he did not have the AIRS Certification. 

14. Plaintiff did not apply for the Senior Staffing Specialist position after Nativi told 

Plaintiff he would not be considered for the position. 

15. Nativi discouraged Plaintiff from applying by stating he was not qualified and 

would not be considered for the position. 

16. On or about August 29, 2016, Defendant hired Kelsie Garlic for the Senior Staffing 

Specialist position. 

17. Kelsie Garlic is Caucasian and did not have the AIRS Certification. 

18. On or about November 24, 2016, Plaintiff obtained his AIRS Certification in order 

to qualify for future promotions and/or recruiting positions. The certification was geared towards 

recruiting, which was a one to two-day course, followed by an exam. The course essentially taught 

the students how to search on the internet for candidates. The exam was 25 questions with two 

hours for completion. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 3 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 4 of 30

19. After Plaintiff completed the AIRS Certification, Garlic questioned Plaintiff about 

the course and what he learned since Garlic did not himself have the Certification. 

20. In or about December of 2016, Plaintiff questioned Defendant about creating a 

recruiting position for him since he had been performing recruiting duties. 

21. Nativi told Plaintiff to be patient with his recruiting goals, that Defendant was 

building a requiring department. 

22. In or about December of 2016, Plaintiff questioned Defendant about attending 

conferences and obtaining other certifications to advance his career and be qualified for future 

promotional opportunities with Defendant. 

23. Nativi advised Plaintiff there was no room in the budget for him to attend 

conferences or obtain any other certifications to advance his career or to be qualified for future 

promotional opportunities with Defendant. 

24. Plaintiff explained to Nativi that his position could easily be split into two positions 

because of his high workload and large amount of responsibilities. 

25. Through his employment with Defendant, Plaintiff discussed the possibilities of 

him becoming a recruiter. During his evaluations, he continuously asked for promotions and to 

attend conferences that would improve his recruiting skills. 

26. In or about the beginning of 2017, Plaintiff began taking PHR (Professional in 

Human Resources) classes on Saturdays at FAU in Boca Raton. 

27. In 2017, Plaintiff repeatedly received positive feedback from coworkers, 

supervisors, and colleagues, including Leonor Hernandez, the regional HR Manager. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 4 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 5 of 30

28. Despite Defendant’s statements that there was no room in the budget for him to 

attend conferences or obtain other certifications, on or about September 1, 2017, Garlic’s salary 

went from approximately $86,699.86 to approximately $110,000. 

29. Plaintiff received a significantly smaller raise in the amount of $7,000 after his first 

year of employment with Defendant. Subsequently, Plaintiff received even smaller raises. 

30. Defendant also gave Garlic the opportunity to work from home two days per week, 

as well as an option to relocate to Arizona. The options of working remotely and relocating out of 

state were not provided to Plaintiff. 

31. Plaintiff suffered emotional stress from being denied the opportunity to promote, 

and watching his Caucasian counterpart enjoy promotions and opportunities. Plaintiff suffered 

physical symptoms from the stress of working in a discriminatory environment including lost 

weight. 

32. On or about September 27, 2017, a Staffing Specialist position became available at 

Defendant’s Garland, Texas location. While it was a position lower than Garlic’s, it was 

nonetheless a promotion and opportunity for Plaintiff to advance. Plaintiff was interested. 

33. Plaintiff approached Nativi regarding the open position in Texas, reminding her 

that Plaintiff’s brother-in-law lives in Texas and that relocating would not be an issue. Nativi once 

again discouraged Plaintiff from applying for a promotion. 

34. Nativi informed Plaintiff that because the position was located out-of-state, 

Defendant would not consider him. Nativi conveyed to Plaintiff it was futile to seek this position 

and not to bother with applying. 

35. While Defendant told Plaintiff it would not consider him for an out-of-state 

position, it gave Garlic, a Caucasian, the option to relocate out of state and work remotely. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 5 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 6 of 30

36. In or about the end of 2017, Defendant gave Plaintiff the menial and entry level 

task of filing. This role was undesirable in that it was a step back towards Plaintiff’s goals of 

advancement. 

37. While Plaintiff was aware the filing was backed up, it wasn’t until he started filing 

did he realize how significantly backed up it was. There were literally pallets of paperwork to be 

filed. 

38. Brint told Plaintiff he wasn’t being paid to file, that he had a master’s degree. 

39. On or about November 13, 2017, Plaintiff met with Nativi regarding his goals. He 

once again reiterated his desire to become a recruiter and overall interest in advancing his career. 

Nativi became visibly annoyed and sternly replied that Plaintiff was to focus on filing as his top 

priority. Thereafter Nativi engaged in strict scrutiny of Plaintiff. 

40. Subsequent to the meeting on or about November 17, 2017 with Plaintiff, Nativi: 

a. Dictated when Plaintiff could take his lunch, despite the policy that 

employees could lunch at any time, as long as the lunch break was no more 

than 60 minutes; 

b. instructed Plaintiff to write down all of his completed tasks if it took him 

more than 30 minutes to complete the task; 

c. instructed Plaintiff to limit his time away from his desk; 

d. checked his LinkedIn profile; 

e. monitored his movements on the camera; and 

f. gave Plaintiff additional menial tasks such as filling in for the Mailroom 

Coordinator, maintenance personnel, or the Front Desk Receptionist. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 6 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 7 of 30

41. During 2017, Plaintiff continued to perform recruiting activities for Defendant 

without the title or pay of a recruiter. He was also filing and performing his job duties as the 

Corporate HR Coordinator. Additionally, he was filling in for the mailroom coordinator, 

receptionist, and maintenance personnel when those employees were out sick or otherwise. 

42. In or about January of 2018, Plaintiff applied for the position of HR Coordinator at 

Defendant’s Ft. Lauderdale location, which was a lateral move for Plaintiff, in order to remove 

himself from the racially hostile environment at the Deerfield Beach, Florida location. 

43. On or about January 18, 2018, Elsa Villanueva contacted Plaintiff to interview for 

the HR Coordinator position in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. 

44. When Plaintiff advised Nativi of his interview for the Ft. Lauderdale position, she 

responded that she knew, having already spoken with Villanueva. Her tone and body language 

were dismissive towards Plaintiff. 

45. On or about January 19, 2018, Plaintiff interviewed for the HR Coordinator position 

in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. During the interview, Unit Manager Fred Gutierrez stated he had 

reservations about Plaintiff’s desire to move laterally. Gutierrez discouraged Plaintiff from taking 

the position stating the Plaintiff was very young, that Defendant wanted a person who would be 

able to stay in the position for 10 years, and that there was no room for growth for me. Gutierrez 

told Plaintiff to do some soul searching over the weekend before he would advise Plaintiff of the 

next steps in the interview process. Gutierrez told Plaintiff that if he still wanted to move forward 

with the position, Plaintiff would need to come back to speak with Gutierrez about the following 

steps in pursuing the HR Coordinator position in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. Plaintiff, having been 

working in HR for several years, knew these comments and behaviors from Gutierrez were not 

common practice. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 7 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 8 of 30

46. During the interview for the HR Coordinator position in Ft. Lauderdale, Plaintiff 

was asked the question what his supervisor would say about him. When he responded in the 

positive, that she would say he was a hard worker, the interviewers responded with a surprised, 

“oh really?” The interviewers were also surprised to hear Plaintiff had never been written up. It 

was clear to Plaintiff Nativi had given negative remarks about Plaintiff to the interviewers. 

47. On or about January 22, 2018, feeling pressured and discouraged from Villanueva, 

Plaintiff asked to be removed from the applicant pool, certain he would not get the position despite 

being qualified and having trained the previously HR Coordinator at the Ft. Lauderdale location. 

48. On or about January 22, 2018, after removing himself from the applicant pool, 

Plaintiff overheard Nativi on the phone with Villanueva and Gutierrez laughing. Nativi was talking 

with her speaker on, and Plaintiff clearly heard Gutierrez say “Stefano decided not to move 

forward. Did you get the email?” After laughter, Nativi stated, “He probably knows I said 

something about him!” More laughter followed. 

49. On or about February 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a formal EEOC complaint about the 

racial discrimination he had experienced thus far. 

50. On or about March 1, 2018, subsequent to Plaintiff’s formal discrimination 

complaint, Nativi put Plaintiff on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). Plaintiff had no writeups or reprimands whatsoever. When Plaintiff questioned Nativi about the PIP, Nativi replied that 

everyone with a “needs improvement” on their performance evaluation was put on a PIP. Plaintiff, 

being an HR employee, knew this to be false and contrary to Defendant’s discipline policies. 

51. Defendant rated two Caucasians, Corey Siggins and Steve Cameron, with “needs 

improvement” on their performance evaluations; however, did not give them PIPs. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 8 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 9 of 30

52. On or about March 1, 2018, subsequent to Plaintiff’s discrimination complaint, 

Nativi again instructed Plaintiff that filing was to be his main priority, and removed all recruiting 

from Plaintiff’s tasks. Coworkers asked Plaintiff if he was now the filing clerk and if he was being 

punished for something. 

53. Subsequent to Plaintiff’s discrimination complaint: 

a. Defendant ostracized Plaintiff from his coworkers by instructing him to 

order food for an HR team luncheon and deliver the food to the HR team 

luncheon, without allowing him to eat lunch with the HR team; 

b. Nativi made loud sighs every time she walked past Plaintiff, began leaving 

sticky notes with tasks on them rather than speaking directly with Plaintiff; 

c. Defendant no longer included Plaintiff in monthly HR team meetings; 

d. Nativi handed Plaintiff his PIP evaluation, a personal HR matter, out in the 

open by his cubicle rather than behind closed doors as she had before with 

personal HR matters his complaint; 

e. Amato told Plaintiff he would instruct managers to no longer give Plaintiff 

work because Plaintiff needed to file; 

f. Nativi instructed Debbie Funicello that Plaintiff could not perform tasks for 

Funicello because of his EEOC complaint; 

g. Defendant requested Plaintiff to sign a PIP form that had inaccurate 

information on it, in that Defendant misrepresented Plaintiff refused to give 

an estimation as to when the filing would be caught up; 

h. Defendant instructed Plaintiff to fill in for the receptionist; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 9 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 10 of 30

i. Defendant assigned Plaintiff time-sensitive tasks then instructed Plaintiff to 

walk around the office to gain signatures, which is extremely time 

consuming, then reprimanding Plaintiff for not completing other timesensitive tasks; 

j. Defendant would not allow Plaintiff to email documents to be signed, which 

was a faster way to gain signatures since some employees were out on PTO, 

working remotely, or not otherwise in the office; 

k. Defendant allowed a non-African American employee, Barbara, to gather 

signatures via email; 

l. Nativi told one of Plaintiff’s coworkers to let Nativi know if Plaintiff missed 

any deadlines so he could be disciplined through his PIP; 

m. Defendant instructed Plaintiff to work in the mailroom; 

n. Nick Di Tempora, the Chairman of the Board, placed his hands around 

Plaintiff’s neck and stated “I could break your neck;” 

54. Defendant posted Plaintiff’s EEOC complaint on its website, after which directors 

stared at Plaintiff, employees no longer spoke with Plaintiff, HR team members stopped inviting 

him to lunch, and others asked Plaintiff if he was ok because they saw his EEOC claim on the 

company’s website. 

55. Defendant posted “SF EEOC Matter” on the company’s Outlook calendar in the 

subject line for a phone call on or about March 27, 2018, again prompting more ostracization of 

Plaintiff from coworkers. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 10 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 11 of 30

56. On or about May 17, 2018, Plaintiff formally complained to Amato regarding the 

racial discrimination and retaliation. Amato stated he would investigate Plaintiff’s complaint, 

however Plaintiff never heard about any investigation. 

57. Defendant’s culture is one that promotes racism by allowing racial comments in the 

workplace, including but not limited to: 

a. “Black people are like dogs, everyone has one;” 

b. “What are you for Halloween? A thug?” 

c. “Do a spiritual dance that will remove the evil spirits since Haitians do 

Voodoo with chickens by cutting off the chicken heads;” and 

d. “Are you trying to be Martin Luther King or Kaepernick, same thing 

happened to Resnick and nothing changed here. You should get out.” 

58. Defendant’s conduct creates a racially hostile culture and one that promotes racism 

by: 

a. Hiring African Americans primarily for hourly and entry level positions; 

b. Promoting primarily Caucasians to management and upper level positions; 

c. Keeping an executive team of exclusively Caucasian or non-African 

American members, specifically the Leadership Team which was 

comprised of Directors, CEO, and Chairman of the Board. 

d. Virtually no African American employees held positions in the Sales 

Department; 

e. Assigning Dr. Teddie Malangwasira, an African American HR Manager, a 

cubicle instead of an office; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 11 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 12 of 30

f. Assigning a Caucasian Staffing Manager, Jack Greenblott, an office rather 

than a cubicle; 

g. Transferring Dr. Malangwasira to a conference room with a table rather than 

a desk after Dr. Malangwasira complained about being in a cubicle; 

h. Asking an African American employee for her tax return upon hiring her 

while not asking Caucasian employees for their tax returns upon their hire; 

i. Not paying Resnick Hampton, an African American employee, the same 

amount as his Caucasian counterparts; 

j. Using Brandon McQuerry, an African American engineer, for tasks such as 

paperwork rather than his function as an engineer; and/or 

k. Refusing an African American employee, Jesse Williams, from selling 

cupcakes while allowing a non African-American employee, Nativi, to sell 

candy. 

59. Defendant’s actions and/or inactions created a hostile work environment for 

Plaintiff. 

60. On or about June 7, 2018, Plaintiff was constructively discharged when he resigned 

in that the working conditions were so difficult and unpleasant that a reasonable person in 

Plaintiff’s shoes would have also been compelled to resign. 

61. Subsequent to Plaintiff’s constructive discharge, Dr. Malangwasira told Plaintiff 

Nativi stated she was excited about Plaintiff’s replacement, an African American being relocated 

from Georgia, “because now it looks like we aren’t racist.” 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 12 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 13 of 30

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 

62. Plaintiff has exhausted all administrative remedies prior to the filing of this 

action. 

63. Plaintiff timely filed a charge of discrimination. Plaintiff filed a Charge of 

Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [“EEOC”] as well as with 

the Florida Commission on Human Relations [“FCHR”]. (Please see a true and correct copy of 

said Charge filed with the Florida Commission on Human Relations attached hereto as Exhibit 

“1”). 

64. It has been more than one-hundred eighty (180) days since the filing of Plaintiff’s 

Charge of Discrimination. 

COUNT I – DISCRIMINATION 

IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C §§ 1981, 1981(A) 

65. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as if set forth 

fully herein. 

66. Defendant engaged in racially discriminatory conduct towards Plaintiff such that 

he was deprived of his civil rights. 

67. Defendant is an employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §1981. 

68. Plaintiff is an African American male, subject to the protections of 42 U.S.C. §1981. 

69. Plaintiff was subject to adverse employment treatment including: 

a. Being discouraged to apply for promotional opportunities; 

b. Being told he was not qualified to apply for promotional opportunities; 

c. Being told he would not be considered for promotional opportunities; 

d. Being denied opportunities to obtain certifications to advance his career 

with Defendant 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 13 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 14 of 30

e. Being denied opportunities to attend conferences to advance his career with 

Defendant; 

f. Not given opportunity to work remotely or relocate out of state; 

g. Being forced to perform menial tasks; 

h. Forced to take lunch when Defendant dictated; 

i. Write down tasks if the tasks took longer than 30 minutes; 

j. Having his movements monitored by Defendant on camera; 

k. Filling in for the mailroom coordinator, front desk receptionist, and 

maintenance personnel; 

l. Having his interview for a position outside the supervision of Nativi 

hijacked by Defendant; 

m. Put on PIP plan despite no writeups or reprimands; 

n. Given menial task of filing; 

o. Being ostracized from his coworkers; 

p. Not included in monthly HR meetings; 

q. Having his personal information made public; 

r. Being forced to walk around to obtain signatures from all employees on 

Veteran and Disability paperwork; 

s. Being reprimanded for not completing time-sensitive tasks after being given 

an impossible amount of tasks to complete, or in other words, being set up 

for failure; 

t. Being subject to racist comments; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 14 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 15 of 30

u. Having the Chairman of the Board put his hands around Plaintiff’s neck 

stating “I could break your neck; and/or 

v. Constructive discharge. 

70. By and through the conduct described above, Defendant permitted a pattern and 

practice of unlawful discrimination by allowing Plaintiff to continue to be subjected to disparate 

treatment and discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§1981,1981(a). 

71. Plaintiff contends that Defendant has a policy, pattern and practice of treating 

similarly situated, Non-African American employees more favorably than African American 

employees. 

72. Plaintiff contends that Defendant applies employment policies such as: antidiscrimination and discipline in a disparate manner. 

73. Defendant failed to acknowledge the discriminatory treatment of Plaintiff. 

74. Defendant knew or should have known that Plaintiff was being discriminated 

against and being treated in a manner disparate and less favorable than other similarly situated 

Non-African American employees by the Defendant, agents, employees and/or representatives. 

75. Despite said knowledge, Defendant failed to take any remedial action. 

76. By and through the conduct described above, Defendant permitted a pattern and 

practice of unlawful discrimination by permitting Plaintiff to be subjected to continuing disparate 

treatment on the basis of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1981. 

77. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

78. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges, that in addition to the 

practices enumerated above, Defendant may have engaged in other discriminatory practices which 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 15 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 16 of 30

are not yet fully known. At such time as the discriminatory practices become known, Plaintiff will 

seek leave of the Court to amend the Complaint in this regard. 

79. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees and/or representatives. 

80. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

81. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

82. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§§1981, 1981(a). 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. §§1981, 1981(a); and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court deems just 

and proper. 

COUNT II – RETALIATION 

IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C §§ 1981, 1981(A) 

83. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as if set forth 

fully herein. 

84. Plaintiff engaged in a statutorily protected activity of complaining about the 

discrimination he experienced. 

85. After he complained, he suffered many adverse employment actions, including but 

not limited to: 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 16 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 17 of 30

a. Being discouraged to apply for promotional opportunities; 

b. Being told he was not qualified to apply for promotional opportunities; 

c. Being told he would be considered for promotional opportunities; 

d. Being denied opportunities to obtain certifications to advance his career 

with Defendant 

e. Being denied opportunities to attend conferences to advance his career with 

Defendant; 

f. Not given opportunity to work remotely or relocate out of state; 

g. Being forced to perform menial tasks; 

h. Forced to take lunch when Defendant dictated; 

i. Write down tasks if the tasks took longer than 30 minutes; 

j. Having his movements monitored by Defendant on camera; 

k. Filling in for the mailroom coordinator, front desk receptionist, and 

maintenance personnel; 

l. Having his interview for a position outside the supervision of Nativi 

hijacked by Defendant; 

m. Put on PIP plan despite no writeups or reprimands; 

n. Given menial task of filing; 

o. Being ostracized from his coworkers; 

p. Not included in monthly HR meetings; 

q. Having his personal information made public; 

r. Being forced to walk around to obtain signatures from all employees on the 

Veteran and Disability paperwork; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 17 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 18 of 30

s. Being reprimanded for not completing time-sensitive tasks after being given 

an impossible amount of tasks to complete, or in other words, being set up 

for failure; 

t. Being subject to racist comments; 

u. Having the Chairman of the Board put his hands around Plaintiff’s neck 

stating “I could break your neck; and/or 

v. Constructive discharge. 

86. There is sufficient evidence of knowledge of Plaintiff’s complaint of 

discrimination, as it was posted on Defendant’s website, and on its company Outlook calendar. 

87. There is a causal link between Plaintiff’s protected activity of complaining about 

racial discrimination and his adverse employment actions, in that, for instance, Nativi instructed 

Debbie Funicello that Plaintiff could not perform tasks for Funicello because of his EEOC 

complaint. 

88. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees and/or representatives. 

89. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

90. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

91. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 18 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 19 of 30

92. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§§1981, 1981(a). 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. §§1981, 1981(a); and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court deems just 

and proper. 

COUNT III – HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT 

IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C §§ 1981, 1981(A) 

93. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as if set forth 

fully herein. 

94. Defendant’s conduct alleged herein was so severe and/or pervasive that it altered 

the terms and/or conditions of Plaintiff’s employment. 

95. Defendant’s workplace permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and 

insult that was sufficiently severe and/or pervasive to alter the conditions of Plaintiff’s employment 

and created an abusive working environment, created by Defendant’s following conduct: 

a. Hiring African Americans primarily for hourly and entry level positions; 

b. Promoting primarily Caucasians to management and upper level positions; 

c. Keeping an executive team of exclusively Caucasian or non-African 

American members, specifically the Leadership Team which was 

comprised of Directors, CEO, and Chairman of the Board. 

d. No African American employees held positions in the Sales Department; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 19 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 20 of 30

e. Assigning Dr. Teddie Malangwasira, an African American Training & 

Talent Management Manager, a cubicle instead of an office; 

f. Assigning a Caucasian Staffing Manager, Jack Greenblott, an office rather 

than a cubicle; 

g. Transferring Dr. Malangwasira to a conference room with a table rather than 

a desk after Dr. Malangwasira complained about being in a cubicle; 

h. Asking an African American employee for her tax return upon hiring her 

while not asking Caucasian employees for their tax returns upon their hire; 

i. Not paying Resnick Hampton, an African American employee, the same 

amount as his Caucasian counterparts; 

j. Using Brandon McQuerry, an African American engineer, for tasks such as 

paperwork rather than his function as an engineer; and/or 

k. Refusing an African American employee, Jesse Williams, from selling 

cupcakes while allowing a non African-American employee, Nativi, to sell 

candy. 

96. The conditions of Plaintiff’s employment were altered in that: 

a. Hiring African Americans primarily for hourly and entry level positions; 

b. Promoting primarily Caucasians to management and upper level positions; 

c. Keeping an executive team of exclusively Caucasian or non-African 

American members, specifically the Leadership Team which was 

comprised of Directors, CEO, and Chairman of the Board. 

d. No African American employees held positions in the Sales Department; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 20 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 21 of 30

e. Assigning Dr. Teddie Malangwasira, an African American HR Manager, a 

cubicle instead of an office; 

f. Assigning a Caucasian HR Manager, Jack Greenblott, an office rather than 

a cubicle; 

g. Transferring Dr. Malangwasira to a conference room without a desk after 

Dr. Malangwasira complained about being in a cubicle; 

h. Asking an African American employee for her tax return upon hiring her 

while not asking Caucasian employees for their tax returns upon their hire; 

i. Not paying Resnick Hampton, an African American employee, the same 

amount as his Caucasian counterparts; 

j. Using Brandon McQuerry, an African American engineer, for tasks such as 

paperwork rather than his function as an engineer; and/or 

k. Refusing an African American employee, Jesse Williams, from selling 

cupcakes while allowing a non-African American employee, Nativi, to sell 

candy. 

97. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees and/or representatives. 

98. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

99. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

100. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 21 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 22 of 30

101. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§§1981, 1981(a). 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. §§1981, 1981(a); and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court deems just 

and proper. 

COUNT IV – CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE 

102. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as is set forth 

fully herein. 

103. Defendant’s conduct and/or lack of conduct alleged herein was so severe and/or 

pervasive that it altered the terms and/or conditions of Plaintiff’s employment. 

104. Defendant’s conduct and/or lack of conduct imposed working conditions that were 

so intolerable Plaintiff was forced to resign. 

105. The working conditions imposed by Defendant’s conduct and/or lack of conduct 

were so intolerable that a reasonable person in Plaintiff’s position would have been compelled to 

resign. 

106. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees and/or representatives. 

107. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 22 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 23 of 30

108. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

109. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

110. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§§1981, 1981(a). 

 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. §§1981, 1981(a); and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court deems just 

and proper. 

COUNT V– DISCRIMINATION 

FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT FLA. STAT. § 760 ET SEQ. 

111. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as if set forth 

fully herein. 

112. Plaintiff engaged in a statutorily protected activity of complaining about the 

discrimination he experienced. 

113. After he complained, he suffered many adverse employment actions, including but 

not limited to: 

a. Being discouraged to apply for promotional opportunities; 

b. Being told he was not qualified to apply for promotional opportunities; 

c. Being told he would be considered for promotional opportunities; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 23 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 24 of 30

d. Being denied opportunities to obtain certifications to advance his career 

with Defendant 

e. Being denied opportunities to attend conferences to advance his career with 

Defendant; 

f. Not given opportunity to work remotely or relocate out of state; 

g. Being forced to perform menial tasks; 

h. Forced to take lunch when Defendant dictated; 

i. Write down tasks if the tasks took longer than 30 minutes; 

j. Having his movements monitored by Defendant on camera; 

k. Filling in for the mailroom coordinator, front desk receptionist, and 

maintenance personnel; 

l. Having his interview for a position outside the supervision of Nativi 

hijacked by Defendant; 

m. Put on PIP plan despite no writeups or reprimands; 

n. Given menial task of filing; 

o. Being ostracized from his coworkers; 

p. Not included in monthly HR meetings; 

q. Having his personal information made public; 

r. Being forced to walk around to obtain signatures from all employees on the 

Veteran and Disability paperwork; 

s. Being reprimanded for not completing time-sensitive tasks after being given 

an impossible amount of tasks to complete, or in other words, being set up 

for failure; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 24 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 25 of 30

t. Being subject to racist comments; 

u. Having the Chairman of the Board put his hands around Plaintiff’s neck 

stating “I could break your neck; and/or 

v. Constructive discharge. 

114. There is sufficient evidence of knowledge of Plaintiff’s complaint of 

discrimination, as it was posted on Defendant’s website, and on its company Outlook calendar. 

115. There is a causal link between Plaintiff’s protected activity of complaining about 

racial discrimination and his adverse employment actions, in that, for instance, Nativi instructed 

Debra Funicello that Plaintiff could not perform tasks for Funicello because of his EEOC 

complaint. 

116. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees and/or representatives. 

117. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

118. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

119. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

120. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to the FCRA. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 25 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 26 of 30

Fla. Stat. § 760 et seq., (FCRA); and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court deems 

just and proper. 

COUNT VI – DISCRIMINATION – DISPARATE TREATMENT 

IN VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, 

TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., (1964) 

121. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all allegations of this Complaint as if set forth 

fully herein. 

122. Defendant is an employer within the meaning of Title VII. 

123. Plaintiff is an African American male, subject to the protections under Title VII. 

124. Plaintiff was subject to adverse employment treatment, including: 

a. Being discouraged to apply for promotional opportunities; 

b. Being told he was not qualified to apply for promotional opportunities; 

c. Being told he would be considered for promotional opportunities; 

d. Being denied opportunities to obtain certifications to advance his career 

with Defendant 

e. Being denied opportunities to attend conferences to advance his career with 

Defendant; 

f. Not given opportunity to work remotely or relocate out of state; 

g. Being forced to perform menial tasks; 

h. Forced to take lunch when Defendant dictated; 

i. Write down tasks if the tasks took longer than 30 minutes; 

j. Having his movements monitored by Defendant on camera; 

k. Filling in for the mailroom coordinator, front desk receptionist, and 

maintenance personnel; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 26 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 27 of 30

l. Having his interview for a position outside the supervision of Nativi 

hijacked by Defendant; 

m. Put on PIP plan despite no writeups or reprimands; 

n. Given menial task of filing; 

o. Being ostracized from his coworkers; 

p. Not included in monthly HR meetings; 

q. Having his personal information made public; 

r. Being forced to walk around to obtain signatures from all employees on the 

Veteran and Disability paperwork; 

s. Being reprimanded for not completing time-sensitive tasks after being given 

an impossible amount of tasks to complete, or in other words, being set up 

for failure; 

t. Being subject to racist comments; 

u. Having the Chairman of the Board put his hands around Plaintiff’s neck 

stating “I could break your neck; and/or 

v. Constructive discharge. 

125. Defendant treated similarly situated, non-African American employees more 

favorably in that non-African American employees: 

a. Could email coworkers for signatures rather than walk around and get the 

signatures manually; 

b. Could work remotely; 

c. Could relocate out of state; 

d. Could apply for promotions; 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 27 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 28 of 30

e. Applied for and received promotions despite lack of credentials; 

f. Had offices rather than cubicles; 

g. Received higher pay; 

h. Performed the job duties that aligned with their positions; 

i. Sold items in the workplace; 

j. Did not receive PIPs after getting a “needs improvement” on their 

performance evaluations; 

k. Hold positions of Leadership Team which was comprised of Directors, 

CEO and Chairman of the Board; 

l. Receive promotions to management and upper level positions; and/or 

m. Hold positions in the Sales Department; 

126. Plaintiff contends the adverse actions described above were pre-textual. 

127. By and through the conduct described above, Defendant permitted a pattern and 

practice of unlawful discrimination by allowing Plaintiff to continue to be subjected to disparate 

treatment and discrimination in violation of Title VII. 

128. Plaintiff contends Defendant has a policy, pattern, and practice of treating similarly 

situated non-African American employees more favorably than African American employees. 

129. Plaintiff contends that Defendant applies employment policies such as hiring 

African Americans for hourly and entry level positions; failing to promote African Americans; and 

keeping an executive team of exclusively Caucasian or non-African American members, 

specifically the Leadership Team which was comprised of Directors, CEO, and Chairman of the 

Board. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 28 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 29 of 30

130. Defendant failed to acknowledge and/or redress the discriminatory treatment of 

Plaintiff. 

131. Defendant knew or should have known that Plaintiff was being discriminated 

against and being treated in a manner disparate and less favorable that other similarly situated nonAfrican American employees by the Defendant, its agents, employees, and/or representatives. 

132. Despite said knowledge, Defendant failed to take any remedial action. 

133. By and through the conduct described above, Defendant permitted a pattern and 

practice of unlawful discrimination by permitting Plaintiff to be subjected to continuing disparate 

treatment on the basis of race in violation of Title VII. 

134. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges, that in addition to the 

practices enumerated above, Defendant may have engaged in other discriminatory practices which 

are not yet fully known. At such time the discriminatory practices become known, Plaintiff will 

seek leave of the Court to amend the Complaint in this regard. 

135. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct, by and through 

its agents, employees, and/or representatives. 

136. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered general, compensatory, 

and punitive damages. 

137. Defendant acted with malice and/or with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s 

federally protected rights. 

138. As a further result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has retained the undersigned 

law firm and is obligated to pay a reasonable fee. 

139. Plaintiff requests that he be awarded damages, including general, compensatory, 

punitive, and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit pursuant to Title VII. 

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 29 of 30
Scott Wagner & Associates, P.A. 

Complaint 

Page 30 of 30

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor against Defendant as 

follows: That Plaintiff be awarded general, compensatory, and punitive damages, reinstatement, 

or front pay, back pay, that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq., (Title VII) and that Plaintiff be awarded such other relief as the Court 

deems just and proper. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

Plaintiffs further demand a jury trial on all triable issues. 

Dated this 13th day of August 2020. 

SCOTT WAGNER & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 

Jupiter Gardens 

250 South Central Boulevard 

Suite 104-A 

Jupiter, FL 33458 

Telephone: (561) 653-0008 

Facsimile: (561) 653-0020 

s/Cathleen Scott 

Cathleen Scott, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 135331 

Primary e-mail: CScott@scottwagnerlaw.com 

Secondary e-mail: mail@scottwagnerlaw.com 

 Secondary Address: 101 Northpoint Parkway 

West Palm Beach, FL 33407 

www.ScottWagnerLaw.com

Case 0:20-cv-61643-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/13/2020 Page 30 of 30