in the circuit court for the state of oregon for...
TRANSCRIPT
COMPLAINT – Page 1 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON
FOR MULTNOMAH COUNTY
KHATAUN THOMPSON and ALYSSA DEWEESE, Plaintiffs, v. TANDEM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., THOMAS CLAREY and TONYA TIEDEMANN, Defendants.
Case No. COMPLAINT Whistleblower Retaliation Amount in Controversy: $40 million Fee Authority: ORS 21.160(1)(e) Filing Fee: $1,111 Jury Trial Requested Not Subject to Mandatory Arbitration
1.
INTRODUCTION
Tandem is a multimillion-dollar corporation that manages a large luxury
apartment community in the West Hills of Portland. In May 2018 during a
renovation project, Tandem corporation executives discovered that their luxury
apartments had recently tested hot for harmful asbestos.
Rather than do the right thing, Tandem corporation executives conspired to
orchestrate a massive coverup to keep the harmful asbestos a secret from tenants,
from workers, and from the government.
This lawsuit is filed by two former Tandem employees who were wrongfully
terminated as part of the Tandem corporation’s systematic coverup.
9/17/2018 10:24 AM18CV41187
COMPLAINT – Page 2 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
JURISDICTION AND THE PARTIES
Plaintiff Khataun Thompson is a natural person and a citizen of Oregon.
3.
Plaintiff Alyssa DeWeese is a natural person and a citizen of Oregon.
4.
Defendant Tandem Property Management, Inc. (Tandem) is a citizen of
Oregon with its principal place of business in Oregon. Tandem was Mr. Thompson’s
and Ms. DeWeese’s employer and conducted regular and sustained business in
Multnomah County, Oregon. Tandem’s registered agent is located in Multnomah
County, Oregon. Mr. Thompson and Ms. DeWeese were supervised by Tandem
employee agents and Mr. Thompson and Ms. DeWeese relied on the actual or
apparent authority of Tandem’s employee agents, supervisors, and management.
5.
Thomas Clarey is a natural person who acted as manager of Mr. Thompson in
the course of Mr. Thompson’s employment with Tandem. Mr. Clarey also acted as
manager of Ms. DeWeese in the course of Ms. DeWeese’s employment with Tandem.
Mr. Clarey is the owner and president of Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 3 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6.
Tonya Tiedemann is a natural person who acted as supervisor of Mr.
Thompson in the course of Mr. Thompson’s employment with Tandem. Ms.
Tiedemann also acted as supervisor of Ms. DeWeese in the course of Ms. DeWeese’s
employment with Tandem. Ms. Tiedemann was an authorized employee agent of
Tandem and was in substantial part acting within the course and scope of such
agency and employment. Ms. Tiedemann was motivated, at least in part, by a
purpose to serve Tandem.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7.
This complaint’s allegations are based on personal knowledge as to Mr.
Thompson’s and Ms. DeWeese’s own behavior and made upon information and belief
as to the behavior of others.
8.
Mr. Thompson began working for Tandem as a groundskeeper on or around
September 23, 2016.
9.
Tandem owns and operates eight large apartment complexes in southwest
Portland and has more than 100 employees.
COMPLAINT – Page 4 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10.
Ms. DeWeese began working for Tandem as a leasing agent in or around
October 2016. At the time of her hire, and throughout her employment with Tandem,
it was openly known in the workplace that she was in a relationship with Mr.
Thompson.
11.
In or around December 2016, Mr. Thompson rented an apartment from
Tandem, which he received at a discount due to his employment. In or around April
2017, Ms. DeWeese rented a separate apartment from Tandem, which was also
discounted due to her employment.
12.
Over his nearly two years of employment with Tandem, Mr. Thompson was a
successful employee. He received multiple promotions and pay raises, and by June
2018, he was promoted to Tandem’s Capital Renovations Team. Mr. Thompson was
told that he would likely be promoted to a maintenance manager position in the near
future.
13.
Additionally, Ms. DeWeese consistently received promotions and pay raises
throughout her employment with Tandem, with her last increase in pay occurring in
or around March 2018. At that time, Ms. DeWeese was told by Tandem that she
would soon be promoted into a property manager position.
COMPLAINT – Page 5 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14.
In or around April 2018, Thomas Cleary, the president of Tandem, met with
Tandem employees and indicated that he intended to renovate part of the Commons
at Sylvan Highlands apartment complex. In order to complete the renovation,
Tandem would need to obtain a loan and meet various bank requirements, including
upgrades to comply with new building codes.
15.
As part of the renovation it was determined that, among other things, walls
would need to be removed in order to reinforce the studs for seismic upgrades of the
building. Once the scope of the demolition was discovered, employees sought a
commercial dumpster to be brought to the Sylvan Highland property for discarded
materials. Because Sylvan Highlands is located in Multnomah County, disposal
companies require environmental reports relating to the materials to be disposed.
The project manager of the demolition requested that Tandem’s Regional Manager,
Tonya Tiedemann and Tandem’s owner, Mr. Cleary, supply the needed report, and
they indicated they would. Without the reports, Tandem could not get a commercial
dumpster for the materials to come to the Sylvan Highlands complex.
COMPLAINT – Page 6 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16.
In or around May 2018, Tandem transferred three non-white employees to
work on the renovation project at Sylvan Highlands. The group began renovations
in five vacant units, which included pulling sheetrock off of the walls and ceilings.
In the process of the renovations, on or around May 23, 2018, the workers found
what appeared to be asbestos. In fact, one of the workers recalled that in a previous
renovation, twelve years earlier, there had been asbestos remediation in the
building. The process was very expensive and the long-time worker recalled that
Tandem directed that only some of the asbestos be remediated, despite regulations
requiring full remediation.
17.
Upon dislodging the apparent asbestos, the team promptly called Ms.
Tiedemann on speaker phone and it was reported that asbestos was potentially
present in the sheetrock. Asbestos is known to cause malignant diseases such as
lung cancer, pleural mesothelioma and peritoneal mesothelioma, and it is believed
to be the number one cause of occupational cancer in the world. Asbestos is
particularly dangerous because microscopic fibers cannot be seen, smelled or tasted,
leading to unknowing exposure.
COMPLAINT – Page 7 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18.
Ms. Tiedemann sounded frustrated that the team was stopping work and
expressed her reservations about telling Tandem’s president, Thomas Cleary, about
the issue because she felt he would “freak out.” Ms. Tiedemann indicated that she
would call the team back with instructions and when she did, she said that Mr.
Cleary would come to the unit to inspect the area himself. Mr. Cleary arrived at the
unit and was furious. Mr. Cleary was emphatic, yelling that there was no asbestos
and that they all needed to get back to work. It was the end of the work day, however,
so the employees left for the day.
19.
The next day, the non-white workers were removed from the Sylvan
Highlands project. Within a few days all three workers were fired because, Mr.
Cleary thought that they were “loose cannons” that might call the Oregon
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) about the potential
asbestos.
20.
In or around June 2018, Mr. Thompson learned that he would be helping on
the renovations project at Sylvan Highlands. At that time, Mr. Thompson had no
knowledge of the suspected asbestos or connected wrongful terminations.
COMPLAINT – Page 8 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
21.
When the project first began, the crew built scaffolding outside of the building
so that they could remove sheetrock that was to be discarded. However, Mr. Cleary
came by the project and told the new team that they needed to take the sheetrock
through the apartment complex hallways and elevator.
22.
On or around June 28, 2018, as Mr. Thompson and his team were removing
sheetrock from a unit at Tandem’s Commons at Sylvan Highlands property, the new
crew found what appeared to be asbestos. Mr. Thompson then learned about the
earlier incident in May related to asbestos. The crew called Ms. Tiedemann and told
her about the new discovery, which also appeared to be asbestos. Ms. Tiedemann
indicated that she would call Mr. Cleary to determine what to do.
23.
In the meantime, unbeknownst to Tandem, a member of the crew took a
sample from the work site to be tested for asbestos. Later that night, the expedited
test revealed that the sample was “hot” and decisively over the limit for legally
acceptable asbestos levels. By this point, at least two groups of employees had been
exposed to asbestos, without first being provided proper training and without
protective gear. In addition, numerous residents had been exposed, based on the
demolition not complying with asbestos remediation regulations, and the
instructions by Mr. Cleary to haul “hot” sheetrock through the halls and elevator.
COMPLAINT – Page 9 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
24.
On the next work day, July 2, 2018, Ms. Tiedemann was notified of the results
of the asbestos test. That same day, Mr. Thompson was assigned to a project away
from Sylvan Highlands. Ms. Tiedemann spent much of the rest of the day trying to
track down which employees were aware that the test confirmed the presence of
dangerous levels of asbestos. Ms. Tiedemann learned that Mr. Thompson was aware
of the test results. Within hours of this discovery, Ms. Tiedemann indicated that Mr.
Cleary viewed Mr. Thompson, the only non-white member of the second crew, as a
“loose cannon.”
25.
On or around July 3, 2018, Ms. Tiedemann directed two non-white Tandem
employees to dispose of 4-5 units of material from Sylvan Highlands at Tandem’s
Commons at Timber Creek property. As it turned out, the material included the
asbestos-laden sheetrock; however, neither employee was provided proper training
or protective gear. The two employees were instructed to dispose of the material at
Timber Creek, because the Timber Creek property is in Washington County, which
has less regulations related to disposal of materials.
COMPLAINT – Page 10 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
26.
On or around July 12, 2018, Mr. Thompson was called in to meet with two
property managers, Eric Dressler and Katelynn Dixon, and Ms. Tiedemann’s new
assistant, Brittany O’Reilly, in Mr. Dressler’s office. Mr. Thompson was quickly
informed that the company is an “at-will employer” and Tandem was ending its
working relationship with Mr. Thompson, effective immediately. Mr. Thompson
asked for clarification, and Mr. Dressler stated he did not have to give a reason and
gave Mr. Thompson his final paycheck. As Mr. Thompson was walking out the door,
Ms. O’Reilly informed him that he did not have to move out of his apartment he
leased with Tandem since his fiancée, Ms. DeWeese, still worked for Tandem.
27.
That same day, realizing Tandem appeared to intend to engage in an asbestos
cover-up, Mr. Thompson reported the asbestos issue to OSHA and the Bureau of
Labor & Industries (BOLI).
28.
On or around July 10, 2018, Ms. Tiedemann directed two employees to finish
cleaning the asbestos-contaminated apartments, without notifying them of the
asbestos finding, and without provided them proper training or protective gear.
COMPLAINT – Page 11 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29.
On or around July 13, 2018, an OSHA investigator arrived to inspect
Tandem’s Commons at Sylvan Highlands property. Later that day, Mr. Thompson
arrived home to find an eviction notice on his apartment door, demanding he vacate
his residence by July 31, 2018.
30.
Throughout the week that followed, Ms. DeWeese was asked by several
coworkers for information about what was going on, because it was well-known in
the workplace that Mr. Thompson had been fired.
31.
Within a few days, Tandem tested Ms. DeWeese’s loyalty by requesting that
Ms. DeWeese help Tandem engage in apparent intimidation and retaliation against
an employee aware of the asbestos test result. On or around July 17, 2018, Ms.
Tiedmann learned that Ms. DeWeese would not carry out the directive.
32.
The next day, on or around July 18, 2018, Ms. DeWeese provided Tandem with
a 30-day notice that she would vacate the apartment she rented with Tandem and
return her keys by July 31, 2018.
33.
On or around July 23, 2018, Ms. DeWeese arrived to work and was met by Ms.
Tiedemann. Ms. DeWeese was immediately given her final paycheck by Ms.
Tiedemann and told that she was being let go.
COMPLAINT – Page 12 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
34.
Shortly after Ms. DeWeese sent her 30-day notice to vacate her apartment to
Tandem, she received a letter from the manager acknowledging receipt of her notice
that stated that if Ms. DeWeese would like to continue renting the garage portion of
her rental, she could do so as long as she paid market rent of $150 effective August
1, 2018 and continuing monthly thereafter. On or around July 30, 2018, OSHA
notified Tandem that material at their property was contaminated with asbestos.
The next day, July 31, 2018, during the scheduled walk through of her apartment,
Tandem decided Ms. DeWeese would no longer be able to rent the garage and she
was told she needed to vacate the garage by the end of that same day. Ms. DeWeese
was storing important personal belongings in the garage that would take time to
move. Ms. DeWeese was told that if she did not return possession of the garage by
the end of that day, Tandem would consider her belongings abandoned property and
move forward with clearing out the garage and disposing of her property. Following
the confirmation of asbestos presence at the Tandem property, Tandem failed to
properly notify residents or employees, exposing them to dangerous, cancer-causing
substances. On or around August 2018, Ms. Tiedemann instructed a Tandem
employee to falsify documents related to the occupancy of the asbestos-contaminated
apartments. Ms. Tiedemann indicated the documents were to be used in connection
with the renovation loan Tandem had applied for, although these false documents
may also have been for the purpose of providing to OSHA investigators.
COMPLAINT – Page 13 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
35.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Claim One Retaliation – ORS 654.062
(Mr. Thompson against Tandem)
Oregon law prohibits corporations from discriminating against an employee
because the employee (a) is about to testify in a proceeding related to the Oregon
Safe Employment Act, (b) opposed an unsafe or unhealthful work environment, (c)
reported in good faith conduct that created an unsafe or unhealthy workplace
environment, or (d) exercised rights related to a safe work environment. See, e.g.,
ORS 654.020 (prohibiting interference with the use of any process adopted for the
protection of any employee in such employment or place of employment); ORS
654.010 (mandating that Oregon employers provide a safe and healthful work
environment); ORS 654.020 (prohibiting interference with processes adopted for the
protection of employees); ORS 654.022 (mandating that Oregon employers obey and
comply with Oregon health and safety regulations); ORS 654.062(1) (mandating
employees notify employer of violations pertaining to safety), et seq.
COMPLAINT – Page 14 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
36.
In perpetrating the behavior described in this complaint, Tandem, acting
through its agents and employees, discriminated against Mr. Thompson in the terms
and conditions of his employment in retaliation for Mr. Thompson’s acts of opposing
an unsafe environment and reporting information pertaining to Oregon health and
safety regulations, as set forth in ORS 654, OAR 839-004-0001, et seq.
37.
By retaliating against Mr. Thompson in this manner, Tandem violated ORS
654.062 and OAR 839-004-0001 et seq., causing harm to Mr. Thompson.
38.
As a direct and proximate result of Tandem’s behavior and choices, Mr.
Thompson has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe
ongoing emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial
not to exceed $20 million. Tandem’s behavior as alleged in this complaint shows a
reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a
conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly, Mr.
Thompson intends to amend his complaint to include a claim for punitive damages
not to exceed $180 million against Tandem. Under ORS 20.107 and ORS 659A.885,
Mr. Thompson is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs. Mr. Thompson
also seeks equitable relief including an injunction stopping Tandem from engaging
in any employment practice which discriminates on the bases as alleged in this
complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 15 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
39.
Claim Two Retaliation – ORS 659A.030
(Mr. Thompson against Tandem)
Tandem’s behavior as alleged in this complaint violated ORS 659A.030(1)(f)
because Tandem treated Mr. Thompson adversely with respect to compensation and
other terms of employment by terminating Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Thompson’s
perceived and actual opposition to unlawful practices was a substantial factor in
Tandem’s adverse treatment.
40.
In perpetrating the behavior described in this complaint, Tandem violated
ORS 659A.030(1)(f) by subjecting Mr. Thompson to discrimination on the basis of
Mr. Thompson’s perceived and actual opposition to unlawful practices, causing harm
to Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson re-alleges his request for equitable relief and fair
compensation and reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs against Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 16 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
41.
Claim Three Race Discrimination – ORS 659A.030
(Mr. Thompson against Tandem)
Tandem’s behavior as alleged in this complaint violated ORS 659A.030(1)(a)
and (b) because Tandem treated Mr. Thompson adversely with respect to
compensation and other terms of employment by terminating Mr. Thompson, and
Mr. Thompson’s race was a substantial factor in Tandem’s adverse treatment.
42.
In perpetrating the behavior described in this complaint, Tandem violated
ORS 659A.030(1)(a) and (b) by subjecting Mr. Thompson to discrimination on the
basis of Mr. Thompson’s race, causing harm to Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson re-
alleges his request for equitable relief and fair compensation and reimbursed
expenses, fees, and costs against Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 17 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
43.
Claim Four Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy
(Mr. Thompson against Tandem)
The public policy of Oregon prohibits a corporation from retaliating and
discriminating against an employee in the terms and conditions of their employment
for opposing unlawful practices. The public policy of Oregon also prohibits a
corporation from retaliating and discriminating against an employee in the terms
and conditions of their employment because the employee has knowledge of the
corporation’s wrongdoing and the corporation desires to silence and discredit that
employee, and prevent the employee from cooperating with OSHA.
44.
This public policy is found in the common law, statutes, and regulations of the
State of Oregon and the United States including, but not limited to ORS 659A.199,
OAR 839-010-0000 et seq., ORS 654.062, and OAR 839-004-0000 et seq.
45.
Tandem, acting through its agents and employees, violated these public
policies by discriminating and retaliating against Mr. Thompson, causing harm to
Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson re-alleges his request for equitable relief and fair
compensation and reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs against Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 18 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
46.
Claim Five Aiding and Abetting – ORS 659A.030(1)(g)
(Mr. Thompson against Mr. Clarey)
Mr. Clarey violated ORS 659A.030(1)(g) by aiding, abetting, inciting,
compelling or coercing unlawful discrimination and retaliation against Mr.
Thompson, by inciting and compelling agents and employees of Tandem to take
adverse actions against Mr. Thompson because of his protected activities, as alleged
in this complaint.
47.
As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Clarey’s behavior and choices, Mr.
Thompson has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe
ongoing emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial
not to exceed $20 million. Mr. Clarey’s behavior as alleged in this complaint shows
a reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a
conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly, Mr.
Thompson intends to amend his complaint to include a claim for punitive damages
not to exceed $180 million against Mr. Clarey. Under ORS 20.107 and ORS
659A.885, Mr. Thompson is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs. Mr.
Thompson also seeks equitable relief including an injunction stopping Mr. Clarey
from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the bases as
alleged in this complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 19 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
48.
Claim Six Aiding and Abetting – ORS 659A.030(1)(g) (Mr. Thompson against Ms. Tiedemann)
Ms. Tiedemann violated ORS 659A.030(1)(g) by aiding, abetting, inciting,
compelling or coercing unlawful discrimination and retaliation against Mr.
Thompson, by inciting and compelling agents and employees of Tandem to take
adverse actions against Mr. Thompson because of his protected activities, as alleged
in this complaint.
49.
As a direct and proximate result of Ms. Tiedemann’s behavior and choices, Mr.
Thompson has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe
ongoing emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial
not to exceed $20 million. Ms. Tiedemann’s behavior as alleged in this complaint
shows a reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm
and a conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly,
Mr. Thompson intends to amend his complaint to include a claim for punitive
damages not to exceed $180 million against Ms. Tiedemann. Under ORS 20.107 and
ORS 659A.885, Mr. Thompson is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs.
Mr. Thompson also seeks equitable relief including an injunction stopping Ms.
Tiedemann from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the
bases as alleged in this complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 20 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
50.
Claim Seven Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy
(Ms. DeWeese against Tandem)
The public policy of Oregon prohibits a corporation from retaliating and
discriminating against an employee in the terms and conditions of her employment
for pursuing her right to associate with an individual that opposed and reported
information in good faith to their employer of a violation of a state or federal law,
rule, or regulation. The public policy of Oregon prohibits a corporation from
retaliating and discriminating against an employee in the terms and conditions of
her employment because the corporation believed the employee would engage in
protected activity, including reporting violations of law, in order to prevent an
employee from engaging in protected activity.
51.
This public policy is found in the common law, statutes, and regulations of the
State of Oregon and the United States including, but not limited to ORS 659A.199,
OAR 839-010-0000 et seq., ORS 654.062, and OAR 839-004-0000 et seq.
52.
Tandem, acting through its agents and employees, violated these public
policies by discriminating and retaliating against Ms. DeWeese as alleged in this
complaint, causing harm to Ms. DeWeese.
COMPLAINT – Page 21 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
53.
As a direct and proximate result of Tandem’s behavior and choices, Ms.
DeWeese has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe ongoing
emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial not to
exceed $20 million. Tandem’s behavior as alleged in this complaint shows a reckless
and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a conscious
indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly, Ms. DeWeese
intends to amend her complaint to include a claim for punitive damages not to exceed
$180 million against Tandem. Under ORS 20.107 and ORS 659A.885, Ms. DeWeese
is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs. Ms. DeWeese also seeks equitable
relief including an injunction stopping Tandem from engaging in any employment
practice which discriminates on the bases as alleged in this complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 22 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
54.
Claim Eight Familial Status Discrimination – ORS 659A.030(1)(a)-(b)
(Ms. DeWeese against Tandem)
ORS 659A.030(1)(a)-(b) says that it is an unlawful practice for a corporation,
on the basis of marital status, “to refuse to hire or employ the individual or to bar or
discharge the individual from employment” or “to discriminate against the
individual in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment.”
55.
Tandem violated ORS 659A.030(1)(a)-(b) by terminating Ms. DeWeese on the
basis of her marital status, causing harm to Ms. DeWeese. Ms. DeWeese re-alleges
her request for equitable relief and fair compensation and reimbursed expenses, fees,
and costs against Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 23 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
56.
Claim Nine Retaliation – ORS 654.062
(Ms. DeWeese against Tandem)
Oregon law prohibits corporations from discriminating against an employee
because the employee (a) is about to testify in a proceeding related to the Oregon
Safe Employment Act, (b) opposed an unsafe or unhealthful work environment, (c)
reported in good faith conduct that created an unsafe or unhealthy workplace
environment, or (d) exercised rights related to a safe work environment. See, e.g.,
ORS 654.020 (prohibiting interference with the use of any process adopted for the
protection of any employee in such employment or place of employment); ORS
654.010 (mandating that Oregon employers provide a safe and healthful work
environment); ORS 654.020 (prohibiting interference with processes adopted for the
protection of employees); ORS 654.022 (mandating that Oregon employers obey and
comply with Oregon health and safety regulations); ORS 654.062(1) (mandating
employees notify employer of violations pertaining to safety), etc.
57.
In perpetrating the behavior described in this complaint, Tandem, acting
through its agents and employees, discriminated against Ms. DeWeese in the terms
and conditions of her employment in retaliation for Ms. DeWeese’s acts of opposing
an unsafe environment and reporting information pertaining to Oregon health and
safety regulations, as set forth in ORS 654, OAR 839-004-0001, etc.
COMPLAINT – Page 24 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
58.
By retaliating against Ms. DeWeese in this manner, Tandem violated ORS
654.062 and OAR 839-004-0001 et seq., causing harm to Ms. DeWeese. Ms. DeWeese
re-alleges her request for equitable relief and fair compensation and reimbursed
expenses, fees, and costs against Tandem.
COMPLAINT – Page 25 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
59.
Claim Ten Aiding and Abetting – ORS 659A.030(1)(g)
(Ms. DeWeese against Mr. Clarey)
Mr. Clarey violated ORS 659A.030(1)(g) by aiding, abetting, inciting,
compelling or coercing unlawful discrimination and retaliation against Ms.
DeWeese, by inciting and compelling agents and employees of Tandem to take
adverse actions against Ms. DeWeese because of her association with Mr. Thompson,
following Mr. Thompson’s protected activities.
60.
As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Clarey’s behavior and choices, Ms.
DeWeese has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe ongoing
emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial not to
exceed $20 million. Mr. Clarey’s behavior as alleged in this complaint shows a
reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a
conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly, Ms.
DeWeese intends to amend her complaint to include a claim for punitive damages
not to exceed $180 million against Mr. Clarey. Under ORS 20.107 and ORS
659A.885, Ms. DeWeese is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs. Ms.
DeWeese also seeks equitable relief including an injunction stopping Mr. Clarey
from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the bases as
alleged in this complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 26 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
61.
Claim Eleven Aiding and Abetting – ORS 659A.030(1)(g)
(Ms. DeWeese against Ms. Tiedemann)
Ms. Tiedemann violated ORS 659A.030(1)(g) by aiding, abetting, inciting,
compelling or coercing unlawful discrimination and retaliation against Ms.
DeWeese, by inciting and compelling agents and employees of Tandem to take
adverse actions against Ms. DeWeese because of her association with Mr. Thompson,
following Mr. Thompson’s protected activities.
62.
As a direct and proximate result of Ms. Tiedemann’s behavior and choices, Ms.
DeWeese has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses and severe ongoing
emotional and mental harm in an amount to be decided by the jury at trial not to
exceed $20 million. Ms. Tiedemann’s behavior as alleged in this complaint shows a
reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a
conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others. Accordingly, Ms.
DeWeese intends to amend her complaint to include a claim for punitive damages
not to exceed $180 million against Ms. Tiedemann. Under ORS 20.107 and ORS
659A.885, Ms. DeWeese is entitled to reimbursed expenses, fees, and costs. Ms.
DeWeese also seeks equitable relief including an injunction stopping Ms. Tiedemann
from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the bases as
alleged in this complaint.
COMPLAINT – Page 27 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
63.
REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
Mr. Thompson and Ms. DeWeese request a trial by a jury of their peers.
64.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Mr. Thompson and Ms. DeWeese respectfully request orders and judgments
in their favor against defendants for equitable and injunctive relief, reimbursed
expenses, fees, costs, pre and post judgment interest, and fair compensation in an
amount to be decided by the jury not to exceed $40 million.
Mr. Thompson and Ms. DeWeese intend to amend this complaint so the jury
may allow additional punitive damages in an amount not to exceed $360 million.
September 17, 2018
RESPECTFULLY FILED,
/s/ Michael Fuller Michael Fuller, OSB No. 09357 Lead Trial Attorney for Plaintiffs OlsenDaines US Bancorp Tower 111 SW 5th Ave., Suite 3150 Portland, Oregon 97204 [email protected] Direct 503-743-7000
(additional counsel on next page)
COMPLAINT – Page 28 of 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Rex Daines, OSB No. 952442 Kelly Jones, OSB No. 074217 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs OlsenDaines The Law Office of Kelly Jones [email protected] [email protected]
Christina Stephenson, OSB No. 102287 Alina Salo, OSB No. 164746 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs Meyer Stephenson Meyer Stephenson [email protected] [email protected]
PROOF OF MAILING
I caused a copy of this complaint to be mailed to the following: Occupational Safety & Health Administration 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room N3626 Washington, D.C. 20210 Oregon Occupational Safety and Health 350 Winter St NE, 3rd Floor Salem, Oregon 97309-0405 Chairperson Deborah Kafoury Board of County Commissioners 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd, Suite 600 Portland, Oregon 97214-3587 September 17, 2018 /s/ Michael Fuller
Michael Fuller, OSB No. 09357 Lead Trial Attorney for Plaintiffs OlsenDaines US Bancorp Tower 111 SW 5th Ave., Suite 3150 Portland, Oregon 97204 [email protected] Direct 503-743-7000