Williams v. Social Security Administration

Background

Nicole Lenoir Williams filed this case without a lawyer against her former employer, the Social Security Administration (SSA), her former supervisor, Leslie Betts, and an SSA Operations Support Branch Chief, Caren Unger. She alleged race, color, national-origin, disability, and age discrimination; retaliation; failure to accommodate her disability; harassment or a hostile work environment; and termination. She relied on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and New York State and City human-rights laws.

Williams alleged that she was hired as an Intake and Scan Clerk at an SSA facility in Jamaica, Queens County, New York, in January 2022. She alleged that she had congestive heart failure, told Betts about her disability, requested a reduction from full-time to part-time work, and was denied that request. She also described disputes over training, leave, attendance, workplace conduct, and communications with supervisors. Unger terminated her during her probationary period on November 7, 2022, citing discourteous conduct and absences without leave. Williams sought damages and reinstatement.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed the amended complaint under the screening rules for a person allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Those rules require dismissal of claims that are frivolous, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s authority. The court also applied the rule requiring a complaint to provide enough factual detail to make a claim plausible.

The court dismissed Williams’s claims under Section 1981, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the New York State and City human-rights laws because those statutes did not provide the available remedies for the alleged discrimination and retaliation arising from her federal employment. The court explained that race- and color-based discrimination claims by federal employees must proceed under Title VII, and disability-discrimination and related retaliation claims by federal employees must proceed under the Rehabilitation Act.

The court dismissed Williams’s Title VII, Rehabilitation Act, and Age Discrimination in Employment Act claims against Betts and Unger because individual employees cannot be defendants under those laws. It also dismissed the claims against the SSA under government immunity and, consequently, for lack of authority to hear those claims. The court stated that the proper defendant was the head of the relevant agency and instructed Williams to name Acting Social Security Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi as the sole defendant.

The court further concluded that Williams had not alleged enough facts to support discrimination or retaliation claims under Title VII, the Rehabilitation Act, or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. For example, it found no facts showing that race, color, religion, sex, or national origin motivated an adverse employment action; that the requested disability accommodation was needed to perform the essential functions of her job; that age was the cause of an adverse action; or that protected activity caused retaliation. The court granted leave to amend because additional facts might allow valid claims to be stated.

Disposition

The court granted Williams 60 days to file a second amended complaint. The new complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the earlier complaints; name Acting Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi as the sole defendant; and provide the relevant people, events, dates, locations, injuries, and requested relief. No summonses would issue at that time.

The order stated that if Williams did not timely amend and could not show a valid reason for the failure, the court would issue an order and judgment dismissing the claims against the SSA under government immunity and for lack of authority to hear them, and dismissing the remaining claims for failure to state a claim. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal from the order. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.