Employee Survival Guide® - Metlife and Employment Racism, Black Lives Matter, and Diversity Initiatives

Episode Date: July 21, 2021

In this episode of the Employee Survival Guide, Mark discusses a current employment discrimination case brought by a former Metlife employee in Connecticut on December 4, 2019.  The employee, who is Black, accuses Metlife of race discrimination in her employment.  Mark examines the company's BLM response and diversity initiatives across the company and the contemporaneous employment discrimination experienced by an employee of the company.  The episode concludes by asking whether Metlife was just marketing in reaction to the George Floyd murder and subsequent protests or whether Metlife really meant to bring about permanent change.   The answer is very clear.Listen to the Employee Survival Guide podcast latest episode here  https://capclaw.com/employee-survival-guide-podcast/If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.  We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts.For more information, please contact Carey & Associates, P.C. at 475-242-8317, www.capclaw.com.The content of this website is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice nor create an attorney-client relationship.  Carey & Associates, P.C. makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the accuracy of the information contained on this website or to any website to which it is linked to. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.

Hey, it's Mark here, and welcome to the next edition of the Employee Survival Guide, where we tell you what your employer does not want you to know about, and a lot more. Today we're going to talk about MetLife and employment racism, Black Lives Matter, and diversity initiatives, all at MetLife. This podcast features a current employment discrimination case brought by a former MetLife employee in Connecticut on December 4th, 2019. The employee, who is black, accuses MetLife of race discrimination in her employment. The case was filed pro se, meaning she filed it herself with the court, and then petitioned the court for what's called informal propolis, meaning that she need

lawyers appointed by the court to assist her because she financially couldn't afford it. I volunteered as pro bono counsel, along a colleague of mine in May of 2020. The case is captioned as Stephanie Cunningham v. MetLife Group. It's 319-CV-01-912 in the District of Connecticut. A copy of the complaint is attached to the actual article on our website. In September 2011, Ms. Cunningham became employed with MetLife in the company's Bloomfield Connecticut offices. She worked there continuously and with good performance reviews until racial problems arose in her employment.

During her tenure, Ms. Cunningham was working towards her Ph.D. in philosophy and eventually has achieved that goal. In July 2017, Ashley Tringo, a biracial African-American, became Ms. Cunningham's supervisor. Ms. Cunningham's former supervisor was Ms. Tringo's husband, a Caucasian. Ms. Tringo asked Ms. Cunningham if she was Puerto Rican, and she responded no, that she was was African American. You're probably wondering, why is the supervisor attempting to discover her race, and why is that even relevant to her work duties? It's not.

Ms. Cunningham retorted that she does not talk about her race at work, and that she was raised African American. Coincidentally, Ms. Cunningham's sister was also employed at the company. Ms. Tringo further asked why Ms. Cunningham and sister, was also employed at the company. Ms. Tringo further asked why Ms. Cunningham and her sister had different textured hair. Specifically, Ms. Tringo inquired if Ms. Cunningham was mixed race or biracial. Adamant, Ms. Tringo argued that she could see the textual differences in the sister's hair and demanded to know why. Again, these are not relevant questions related to work and are discriminatory based upon race,

even if asked by a biracial supervisor. During her training, Ms. Cunningham was confronted by another African-American employee who was providing job training. The employee stated to Ms. Cunningham, quote, you are a fake black person, end quote. Ms. Cunningham immediately reported the incident to Human Resources and explained how shocked she was by the work environment at MedLife. An investigation ensued, but as usual, the company failed to confirm the existence of any discrimination or even that the racial statement was made. In October 2017, Ms. Tringo abruptly gave Ms. Cunningham a written warning that was factually baseless and intended to harass Ms. Cunningham. factually baseless and intended to harass Ms. Cunningham. During her employment, she would attend daily team huddles, wherein Ms. Tringo again made comments about Ms. Cunningham's hair that it's kinky and looks like pubic hair. Again, why is this even relevant to Ms. Cunningham's work

duties and performance? It's not. It's discriminatory. Ms. Tringo would often discuss her personal life while at work in front of Ms. Cunningham. Quote, Ms. Tringo described often discuss her personal life while at work in front of Ms. Cunningham. Ms. Tringo described the details of taking a shower with Matt, her husband, and Ms. Cunningham's former supervisor at his parents' house, compared to her new master bedroom at her new home with sexual inferences added in. Ms. Tringo stated that she had more white girlfriends than black ones, and in fact, she stated she didn't even have any black girlfriends. She also told a plaintiff, reading from the complaint, of course, and others how she was a bully in school and that she had her friends help her bully and taunt a girl for stealing her sneakers, end quote. That's from the First Amendment Complaint, paragraph 23. On July 17, 2017, a federal judge in Manhattan approved a $32.1 million settlement to resolve a racial discrimination class action suit filed by former MetLife Financial Service representatives.

Quote, at MetLife, we are committed to promoting a diverse and inclusive workspace and do not condone discrimination. End quote. This is from Kim Friedman, a company spokesman reported back in 2017 to Bloomberg BNA. On April 25, 2018, MetLife received a state agency complaint for racial discrimination that Ms. Cunningham had filed the same day via telephone. On that same date, Ms. Cunningham received a written warning for allegedly, quote, not being productive, end quote. She refused to sign the warning. quote, not being productive, end quote. She refused to sign the warning. After being handed the warning, Ms. Cunningham just started to cry as she tried so hard to rise above all the discriminatory conduct and finally hit a wall. After the complaint was filed, Ms. Tringo targeted Ms. Cunningham and made

every attempt to force her to quit. Eventually, Ms. Cunningham was forced to take a medical leave of absence on June 7, 2018, due to the enormous stress caused by Ms. Tringo's racial discrimination directed at her. Before her leave, Ms. Cunningham repeatedly complained to HR in January 2018, but nothing was ever done to correct the racially hostile work environment, which continued until the day Ms. Cunningham left on a short-term disability leave of absence. She relayed all of Ms. Tringo's racial comments, that her hair looks like pubic hair, whether her hair was real, if she used chemicals to straighten her hair, if she was the lightest one in her family, etc. The human resources employee admitted Ms. Cunningham should not

have been treated in this discriminatory manner and told her she would speak to Ms. Tringo directly. Ms. Cunningham requested a transfer out of the department, but the human resources employee stated that she had to work out her differences with Ms. Tringo. How does a black employee work out quote-unquote differences created by a racist biracial supervisor they are forced to work under? Things got even worse. Ms. Cunningham was denied a promotion by Ms. Tringo, which was given to a lesser qualified Caucasian co-worker. In February 2018, Ms. Cunningham again complained to HR, asking to be removed from the unhealthy work environment. The Human Resources employee denied her request.

On May 7, 2018, MetLife concluded its purported investigation of Ms. Cunningham's complaints of racial discrimination and reported that it had found no racial issues. No surprise here, folks. The HR investigator told Ms. Cunningham she had interviewed her co-workers, but Ms. Cunningham asked her co-workers if anyone from HR had called them. Her co-workers all denied being questioned by HR. On June 6, 2018, Ms. Cunningham filed a police report complaining of a hostile work environment and racial discrimination. We often find times employees will file police reports, but they don't have any legal repercussions to their employment cases.

On June 1, 2020, MetLife tweeted on its social media account, quote, as a company that is deeply committed to diversity, inclusion, and human rights, we will strengthen our resolve in advocating for change and doing our part so that we build a society that protects all people and values all voices, end quote. On June 18, 2020, the MetLife Foundation, quote, announced it was committing $5 million over the next three years to advance racial equity in the United States. Mind you, this is the same period of time that most companies were pivoting to after the George Floyd murder to support Black Lives Matter and diversity issues. The foundation quote goes on to say, the foundation will use the

funds to promote black educational and career opportunities, black business ownership, and racial justice initiatives. MetLife Foundation's $5 million pledge will supplement the $10 million in annual contributions it already makes to support diverse communities and racial equality, However, MetLife never defines what these initiatives are or defines impact investments. You would need to research these companies' filings made to the Securities Exchange Commission. But who besides me has the time and patience to do so? No one. That's the point. It's all a marketing and public relations program to make it appear MetLife is concerned about important social issues. The MetLife Foundation announcement goes on to include this statement. Quote, in 2019, MetLife joined the CEO Action for

Diversity and Inclusion, the largest CEO-driven business commitment to advance diversity and inclusion in the workplace, end quote. The MetLife CEO is Michael Kalaf, I apologize for the mispronunciation of his name, who reportedly earned $15 million in total compensation in 2020. All CEOs who joined the initiative pledged a specific set of actions the signatory CEOs will take to cultivate a trusting environment where all ideas are welcomed and employees feel comfortable and empowered to have discussions about diversity and inclusion, end quote. Remember, this CEO initiative began at the same time Ms. Cunningham's racial discrimination case was getting underway. The CEO pledge reveals the primary goal for all company CEOs that sign it.

We know that diversity is good for the economy. It improves corporate performance, drives growth, and enhances employee engagement. The pledge contains four commitments all company CEOs have committed their organizations to. Number one, we will continue to make our workplaces trusting places to have complex and sometimes difficult conversations about diversity and inclusion. Number two, we will implement and expand an unconscious bias education. Number three, we will share best and unsuccessful practices. education. Number three, we will share best and unsuccessful practices. And finally, four, we will create and share strategic inclusion and diversity plans with our board of directors. On June 24, 2020, MetLife tweeted, quote, inclusion is a priority at MetLife. Click here to read how we're

using our global hashtag inclusion and hashtag diversity insight study to strengthen our culture, end quote. When you click on the last link in the text, it produces a 404 error code, meaning that the company page was taken down. Why? We don't really know. According to the company's website regarding global diversity inclusion, quote, our workplace, end quote, the company fails to include any information about blacks on the set of pages describing current diversity and inclusion initiatives. Again, why? On June 21, 2021,

MetLife filed a certified EEO-1 form to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which reveals that no, or zero, blacks or African Americans occupy positions in the C-suite. Overall, blacks or African Americans occupy only 3% of the entire company workforce. In comparison, blacks and African Americans comprise 13.4%, according to the most recent 2019 census data. However, Dr. Cindy Pace, the African American, is the Vice President Global Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer at MetLife, and she has held this role since April 2019. She tweets at twitter.com forward slash SavvyCindy.

Ms. Cunningham's case continues to the present. As her attorneys, we have recently filed motions to compel further discovery and motions for sanctions against the defense and their legal counsel. The issues involved in each motion address the wholesale failure to provide relevant discovery to Ms. Cunningham and absurd legal objections designed to conceal the very same racial discrimination alleged in the First Amendment complaint. In addition, MetLife has sought to shield a great many documents behind the attorney-client privilege. However, as claimed in Ms. Cunningham's motions, MetLife abused the attorney-client privilege because the attorney identified in the defendant's privilege log

was not admitted in Connecticut during all dates of his communications from New York to the defendant's employees in Connecticut who were handling Ms. Cunningham's internal complaints of discrimination and her agency complaint for the same. Strangely, during a telephone conference call with opposing counsel, I was sternly warned by defendant's counsel not to pursue a claim for unauthorized practice of law by the out-of-state attorney in New York, who was also a former associate at the

same law firm. Both the district court and the statewide grievance committee will have to decide this issue. So, what is your impression regarding MetLife's efforts to support Black Lives Matter, diversity initiative, while also handling Ms. Cunningham's case during the same time period? Is MetLife canceling Ms. Cunningham while at the same time seeking to promote its corporate image related to the treatment of blacks in America? The aforementioned information was all derived from publicly available information. If you'd like more information about this podcast episode, please contact our employment attorneys at Caring Associates PC or email at info at capclaw.com. Have a great week and be well.