You are viewing Allergic Living United States | Switch to Canada
Allergies, Asthma & Gluten-free

SIGN UP For Our Free e-Newsletter

Submit
Click To See Past Newsletters
Food Allergy

Panera Denies Discrimination, Faults Allergic Employee

DustinMaldonadoDustin Maldonado. Photo: Handout

The lawsuit filed by a man with multiple food allergies that claims Panera LLC, a division of Panera Bread Co., the man’s former employer, discriminated against him due to his allergies and condoned a hostile work environment, is proceeding to the “discovery” stage where both sides will exchange evidence.

On March 4, 2016, the company also denied any wrongdoing in its official reply to the suit launched by Dustin Maldonado, which it filed in New York federal court.

In its point by point reply, Panera’s lawyers state that the company “took reasonable steps to prevent [Maldonado] from being discriminated or retaliated against, including but not limited to adopting policies against such actions applicable to all Panera employees.” They added that Maldonado “failed, in whole or in part, to take reasonable steps to avoid being discriminated against or retaliated against, including but not limited to repeatedly failing to counsel or discipline any subordinate employees who allegedly engaged in discriminatory or retaliatory behavior, and failing to report many of the alleged acts of discrimination and retaliation in a timely manner.”

In the original complaint filed by Maldonado’s lawyers in November 2015, the former bakery employee contended that “the harassment was not only tolerated by management, but led by management.” Maldonado’s suit made note of multiple incidents in which the café’s general manager engaged in harassment with and without other employees where Maldonado was exposed to his allergens, in at least one case triggering an allergic reaction, according to the man’s legal representatives, Stein & Vargas, LLP.

In its reply, Panera asks the court to “dismiss the complaint in its entirety,” and seeks compensation for legal fees “incurred in defending against plaintiffs’ baseless and frivolous action.”

At the discovery stage, in addition to the exchange of evidence, both parties are required by New York state law to attend “mandatory mediation” in an effort to resolve the dispute before trial. Allergic Living will continue to follow the case, and bring our readers updates.

To give us feedback on this article, please email comments@allergicliving.com

Close Close Free E-Letters From Allergic Living Free E-Letters From Allergic LivingFree E-Letters From Allergic Living