Employee's case Dismissed After Suing Wrong Employer Defendant

Often times, employees name parent companies and other affiliated entities when suing their employers, seeking to hold responsible anyone and everyone who could possibly be construed to be the "employer" for the purposes of employment law related claims. That plan backfired on a New York employee, after she attempted to recover from a holding company who really had no employment relationship with the employee.

In Shiflett v. Scores Holding Company, Inc., No. 14-1594-cv (2d Cir. February 19, 2015), a cocktail waitress at Scores West Side filed suit, claiming race and gender discrimination and that she was subjected to retaliation when she complained about the treatment.  

The waitress filed the suit against Scores Holding, who then sought dismissal on the grounds that it was not her employer for purposes of Title VII claims. The district court agreed and dismissed the waitress's claims. 

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. The court looked to both the single employer and joint employer doctrines and found that the waitress failed to demonstrate that either were applicable here. The court found that the waitress had failed to demonstrate that the holding company was her employer for the purposes of Title VII. Though there was some evidence of common ownership between companies, that is just a single factor in determining whether there exists an employment relationship. The court also pointed out that there was no evidence that the holding company actually controlled labor relations, even though the waitress submitted as evidence a printout from Scores Holding's website regarding attracting and training personnel and a handbook which included the address and phone number for Scores Holding. 

Employers should always consider, as a first-step defense, whether the employee has asserted claims against the proper legal entity which was the "employer." Just because an entity has some business or legal relationship with the employer does not always mean that it is or can be held responsible for its alleged violations of employment law.