No. 21-286

Abeba Mekonnen v. OTG Management, LLC, et al.

Lower Court: First Circuit
Docketed: 2021-08-26
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: discrimination-claims employee-manual employment-laws employment-termination fair-pay-act ledbetter-fair-pay-act mystery-shopper mystery-shopper-report performance-evaluation procedural-due-process termination wage-hour-law
Key Terms:
Arbitration SocialSecurity Securities
Latest Conference: 2021-10-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether employers can terminate employees based on a 'Mystery Shopper Score'

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED. Shopper Report i mployees by a Mystery 1. Whether employers can terminate employ: 1 in the context of Employment Laws. ‘hi of “three failing can terminate my employment by reason 2. Whether employer ‘e) , hich the manual has N' » allegedly per the Employee Manual whic Mystery Shopper Score” alleg' syed on 8/4/2007. ? . “Mystery Sho pper's Program” that I receiv such provision about “My ture and . 07 signature an her it was legal by the employer to attach my August 4, 2007 sign eter ys WT nesicion about Mystery Shopper Program.? 4. Whether the new Employees' Manual can be the ground for terminating employees especially when the very word/clause of the program itself indicated that the program is only for “performance training” by awarding employees from $50-100 for those who score from 85%-100% but give more training “again” for those who score below 70%. 5. Whether the district court and the court of appeals for the first circuit were not erred in violating the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of Jan. 2, 2009 by dismissing the plaintiffs Title VII claims, the and Massachusetts Wage and Hour law, the Disability discrimination claims, Age and Gender based discrimination claims all involved compensation, * 1 . 6. Whether it was not more than abuse of discretion by the district judge not only denying discovery right of my own Time Card and Payroll Record from employer despite motioning and re-motioning several times for reconsideration. ° 7. Whether the district court has power to change the party's Theory of Argument?. In other word when I allege disparate treatment (regardless color, national origin etc.) the judge compared me with disabled people he created in mind but I did not alleged the disparte treatment on ground of disability 8. Whether the district judge has not misuse the Vexatious Litigant Statute by improperly using it as a tool to adversely decide against my case rather than follow what remedial prescription (bond, pre-filing fee ...etc) as stated in the law. * 2 LZ .

Docket Entries

2021-10-12
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-09-13
Waiver of right of respondent OTG Management to respond filed.
2021-08-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 27, 2021)

Attorneys

Abeba Mekonnen
Abeba Mekonnenq — Petitioner
Abeba Mekonnenq — Petitioner
OTG Management
Jeffrey Scott SiegelMorgan, Brown & Joy, LLP, Respondent
Jeffrey Scott SiegelMorgan, Brown & Joy, LLP, Respondent