|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
For 16 years, Sharlett Downing worked as a counselor at Woodside High School. In the midst of her career, she was diagnosed with multiple mental health conditions and began receiving work accommodations in 2016. But when higher-ups in the Sequoia Union High School District left the district after the COVID-19 pandemic, her requests for continued flexibility were denied, according to a wrongful termination lawsuit she filed on May 15 in San Mateo County Superior Court.
Downing, who has since left the role at Woodside, said in the lawsuit that the district violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act which protects employees from prejudice based discrimination and harassment. Downing also served as Woodside High’s Black Student Union co-advisor and the school’s union representative. Downing is represented by Leigh Law Group, which is based out of San Francisco.
In 2012, Downing was diagnosed by a doctor with anxiety, depression and ADHD and started receiving accommodations from the district from 2016 to 2019. She was able to work from home, start work at a later time and received intermittent absences. It wasn’t until 2021 when the district experienced high turnover in the human resources department that Downing’s accommodations began to shift.
In April 2021, the district called for all staff and students to return in person after a year of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Downing requested to meet with the district’s human resources department prior to the start of the school year to discuss her accommodations but didn’t receive a response, according to Downing. Jacqueline McEvoy was the previous assistant superintendent of human resources until August 2021. The position was filled by an interim until the current assistant superintendent of human resources, Todd Beal, was hired in January 2022.
In the past, Downing would have regular meetings with her supervisors to discuss accommodations at the start of the school year along with check-ins throughout the year.
The lack of response led Downing to explore medical retirement under the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, according to the suit.
During the 2021-22 school year, Downing intermittently worked from home when symptomatic. She had the help of other counselors at WHS to coordinate meetings with students virtually while she was working from home and continuously making attempts to request accommodations.
Downing also shared a doctor’s note with Beal in January 2022 and March 2022 asking for work accommodations but both were ignored. By April 12, 2022 she formally requested a leave of absence.
On March 23, 2022 the district scheduled a meeting to discuss accommodations over the phone for April 8, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. to discuss work accommodations and her request for a six-week leave of absence to receive therapy. The meeting would be facilitated by Shaw Consulting, an external consulting group.
Downing was concerned over sharing private information over the phone with the presence of a company she was unfamiliar with as well as her preference to have meetings at the end of the day so her anxiety would not get triggered and affect her work day. Her concerns on privacy were ignored but the meeting was rescheduled for April 19, 2022 at 2:30 pm.
The meeting included Downing, Beal, a California Teachers Association representative, WHS Instructional Vice Principal Cara Klackle, and a Shaw HR Consulting representative hired by the district.
After the meeting was scheduled, Downing received a letter stating that the district had put her on paid administrative leave from April 7, 2022 “pending the outcome of the April 19, 2022 interactive meeting.” Downing told this news organization that she felt embarrassed to find out the district had done this.
During the meeting, Downing recalls not being given the opportunity to discuss accommodations that she sought to receive and was misled by what would be explored during the meeting. She instead was denied medical leave and informed that she would be placed on a 39-month rehire list. This was a decision that Shaw HR Consulting had made, according to Downing.
The 39-month rehire list is used to terminate employees who have exhausted all paid and unpaid leave and are still medically unable to work with reasonable accommodations. Individuals on the rehire list lose their income and benefits, but are given priority in the hiring process when positions are open and they are able to work again. For 39 months, the district must alert and offer any vacant jobs to those on the list.
“My medical benefits were cut in the middle of a medical emergency,” said Downing, who lost all benefits by the end of April. “It was totally blindsighted.” She felt she was being treated like a disciplinary issue.
Since being placed on the list two years ago, Downing said she has not been offered any vacant counseling positions.
Downing believes that the district considered her leave as “not reasonable to provide” due to the lack of serious awareness of mental health conditions as a disability.
According to education code 44986 and SUHSD board policy 4161, Downing argues she should have been granted a leave of absence under her disability benefits in which a substitute would take her place while she was away. According to Downing, other WHS counselors had to take on her student caseload, when she was placed on the rehire list.
By filing this lawsuit, she hopes to create more awareness toward discriminatory actions by the district.
“One of the most troubling patterns I’ve observed is the lack of genuine accountability when complaints occur. Instead of acknowledging mistakes and taking corrective action, the district has contracted with lawyers to defend their every error,” said Downing.
SUHSD was also named in another discrimination lawsuit in April 2024 involving two 16-year-old Black Menlo-Atherton High School students, who were allegedly forcefully arrested and detained. One of the students struggles with an intellectual disability, according to the claim.
“It’s not just about my case — this is a systemic problem that affects many within our (SUHSD) community,” Downing said. “We need a system that prioritizes justice and the well-being of our community members over the interests of legal protection and financial liability.”
In a response to the lawsuit, the district denied all allegations of the complaint and denied it caused any harm or injury to Downing. It also stated, in a response to the complaint, that even if the district had an illegal motive for taking any adverse employment action toward Downing, the district “would have made the same decision for legitimate reasons unrelated to discrimination, retaliation, or any illegal motives.” It also notes that Downing failed to report the alleged discrimination or retaliation in a timely manner.
“Defendant’s conduct was not discriminatory because, even with reasonable accommodation(s), plaintiff was unable to perform at least one essential job duty without endangering her health or safety and/or the health or safety of others,” the response states.
The district notes that it provided various accommodations to Downing during her employment and that additional requests for accommodations “were not reasonable, and if granted, would create an undue financial and/or operational hardship” to the district.
A trial date has not been set as of Aug. 9. A case management conference is scheduled for Oct. 17 at 9 a.m.
“People need to know the truth,” she said. “This needs to be made right.”
She is seeking to recover lost wages and benefits; compensation for emotional distress, embarrassment, humiliation and other general damages; attorney’s fees and costs; and other relief as the court deems appropriate and just.
You have to understand that this district is wasting tax payers money by protecting a corrupt Board of trustee, administrators and anyone who is not liked based on race. Worst all those innocent children are at risk until there is a change. I pray parents start to get answers before their children are hurt from the above.
Another minority from payroll department was put onl eave after 25 years of serive yet the same administration now claim she needs to go, Why are tax payers paying for defense of this system that is losing all its resources yet giving raises to the ones who target innocent teachers and children. Its like we’ve gone back 200 years with this group and let them pay their own legal defense and leave the funds for the children who need the support