Dawson v. Microsoft

1 FILED
2019 FEB 05 09:00 AM

2 KING COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT CLERK
3 E-FILED
CASE #: 19-2-03421-1 SEA
4
6
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING
8 CHRISTILDA JENEPHER DAWSON, CASE NO.:
9 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

v.
10 1. Age Discrimination
11 2. Color/Race Discrimination
MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a 3. Sex Discrimination
Washington Corporation,
12 4. Retaliation Against Whistleblower
Defendant. 5. Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair
13 Dealing
6. Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public
14 Policy
15
and
16
JURY DEMAND (12)
17
I. INTRODUCTION
18
1.1 Christilda Dawson (“Plaintiff” or “Dawson”) brings this unfair employment
19
practices and whistleblower retaliation action against her former employer Microsoft Corporation
20
(“Microsoft”). Ms. Dawson was consistently recognized as an ambitious high performer
21
throughout her more than four years of employment with Microsoft. She earned the highest
22
available performance-based bonuses, including a Best Hire/Key Talent bonus, and she was
23
singled out for several promotions. Plaintiff earned eight awards for her excellent performance,
24
including the prestigious Microsoft Circle of Excellence Gold Club Award.
25
26
MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

COMPLAINT - 1 2448 76TH AVE SE, SUITE 100
MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040
206-236-2769
1 1.2 Things changed for Plaintiff after she availed herself of Microsoft’s internal
2 reporting procedures when she reported Defendant’s unlawful and discriminatory employment
3 practices. Microsoft immediately embarked upon a retaliation campaign against Ms. Dawson.
4 The retaliation culminated with Microsoft terminating Ms. Dawson’s employment by falsely
5 claiming her position was eliminated. In fact, Microsoft replaced Ms. Dawson with a younger
6 male.
7 1.3 Microsoft violated state law by retaliating against Ms. Dawson for opposing what
8 she reasonably believed to be discrimination on the basis of age, color and/or race and sex.
9 Microsoft’s actions constitute further violations of state law because age, color and/or race and
10 sex were significant motivating factors in bringing about Defendant’s decision to terminate Ms.
11 Dawson.
12 II. THE PARTIES
13 2.1 Plaintiff Christilda Dawson is a former employee of Defendant Microsoft. She is a
14 resident of King County, Washington, where she was employed by Microsoft until she was
15 terminated on October 1, 2018. At all times pertinent to this complaint, Plaintiff was an
16 “employee” within the meaning of the Washington Law Against Discrimination (“WLAD”),
17 RCW 49.60.
18 2.2 Defendant Microsoft Corporation is a Washington corporation registered to do

19 business in Washington State. Defendant is an “employer” within the meaning of the WLAD.
20 At all times relevant hereto Microsoft maintained an office in Redmond, Washington where the
21 Defendant conducted business.
22 III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
23 3.1 This court has original jurisdiction under RCW 2.08.010. Venue is proper in King
24 County, Washington under RCW 4.12.020 and 4.12.025 because Defendant is a resident of King
25 County and King County is the county in which the cause of action or some part thereof arose.
26

206-236-2769
1 IV. FACTS AND BACKGROUND
2 4.1 Ms. Dawson is a 48-year old Indian American.
3 4.2 Plaintiff is an industrious and professionally successful mother of two.
4 4.3 Plaintiff began working for Microsoft when she was hired as Senior Partner
5 Marketing Manager/SBM Lead for the LSP Channel on February 24, 2014. Plaintiff made an
6 immediate and positive impact in the new role and was nominated for Microsoft’s FY15 Circle
7 of Excellence Gold Club in her first year of service.
8 4.4 In recognition of Plaintiff’s excellent performance, and as a promotion, Defendant
9 selected Plaintiff to join the Microsoft US Small Medium Business (“SBM”) team in July 2015.
10 On July 21, 2015 Plaintiff was hired as Senior Partner Marketing Manager for the Top Line CSP
11 Distribution Partner in the US Market. In this role Plaintiff’s enhanced responsibilities included:
12 responsibility for planning and execution of integrated marketing strategies, budget management,
13 compliance, audit and ROI reporting, and comprehensive relationship management.
14 4.5 Plaintiff was recognized as a subject matter expert; a high-performer who made an
15 immediate and positive impact. She won eight awards after joining the US SMB Distribution
16 team. In addition to awards, Defendant’s recognition of Plaintiff’s tremendous performance
17 during this period included: a promotion, a performance-based merit increase, a performance-
18 based cash bonus, a performance-based stock award, and the Best Hire Key Talent Award. In
19 Microsoft’s fiscal year 2016 these performance-based awards to Plaintiff totaled $89,500.00.
20 4.6 In December 2015 Defendant provided Plaintiff with outstanding performance
21 reviews. Plaintiff’s supervisor Joan Shea wrote: “Jen has accomplished great things in Q4 . . .
22 Jen excelled this year in transformative marketing which laid the groundwork for FY 17 success
23 . . . Jen earned a Gold club award for her innovative marketing work with a Could Bootcamp
24 series, partnership with ISV’s, and overall transformative marketing and a growth mindset . . .
25 Jen was promoted mid-year to a level 64 for her efforts in marketing with Ingram Micro.”
26

206-236-2769
1 4.7 Plaintiff was also recognized with the CPE award in March 2016. The CPE award
2 recognizes leadership and commitment to partner satisfaction.
3 4.8 Plaintiff was acknowledged as a top-performer both inside and outside of Microsoft.
4 In October 2015 Plaintiff received Ingram Micro’s Cloud Marketing Partner of the year award
5 for her work on behalf of Microsoft. The award marked the first time Ingram Micro had
6 recognized Microsoft with such an honor. Ingram Micro is one of the world’s largest distributors
7 of Microsoft products.
8 4.9 In addition to Plaintiff’s stellar performance on core job responsibilities, Plaintiff
9 consistently sought out additional avenues where she might contribute through volunteer work in
10 the community on behalf of Microsoft. In October 2016 and October 2017 she volunteered for,
11 and was selected, Vice President Appointment Lead (“VPAL”) for the Microsoft GIVE
12 campaign. Plaintiff succeeded in the role accomplishing Microsoft’s charitable goals and
13 securing the highest participation numbers.
14 4.10 Plaintiff always sought out “microvolunteering” opportunities, including donating
15 her efforts to the United Way of King County. Plaintiff was engaged in the community, where
16 she worked with Microsoft to promote diversity and better the community for all. As an example,
17 Ms. Dawson was invited to participate as a panel member at the University of Washington Foster
18 School of Business, where she was an alumna, assisting new immigrants with their education and
19 professional networking in the community.
20 4.11 In November 2016 Defendant again provided Plaintiff with outstanding
21 performance reviews prior to Plaintiff reporting employer misconduct. Plaintiff’s supervisor Joan
22 Shea wrote: "Jen is an amazing team member and leader of the Ingram Micro SMB Business
23 Unit. Jen shows up every day looking for new and innovative ways to ensure her partner is on
24 the path to becoming a dominate solution aggregator in the CSP space . . . Jen is innovative in
25 her approaches and exhibits a growth mindset on a daily basis . . . In particular this quarter, Jen
26 has done a lot around leveraging social media outlets to drive increased demand and awareness

206-236-2769
1 around CSP for 0365 and Azure… These actions will help Jen drive for increased sales results.
2 Jen is not afraid to try new approaches and has positioned herself as a leader in marketing
3 innovation on the team. Jen's peers regularly look to her for leadership and guidance when
4 navigating difficult situations . . . Her knowledge of the channel and doing business at Microsoft
5 is very apparent . . . Jen has a bright future ahead of her here at Microsoft." (emphasis added).
6 4.12 Plaintiff became concerned when she observed repeated incidents of what she
7 reasonably believed to be discriminatory acts by employer Microsoft, undertaken on the basis of
8 age, color and/or race and sex. As an example, Plaintiff observed a Latino female denied
9 employment. A member of Microsoft senior management instructed a Microsoft hiring manager
10 “She is a Latino who cannot speak English properly, we cannot put her in front of our partners.
11 Please come up with another reason to say no to her.” Plaintiff also observed what she reasonably
12 believed to be discrimination on the basis of age and sex. Ms. Dawson felt compelled to raise the
13 issues internally.
14 4.13 Plaintiff raised the issues internally to Microsoft management. Plaintiff continued
15 to see Defendant engage in discriminatory acts, and in March 2017 she officially complained of
16 the discriminatory practices in writing through what she believed to be the appropriate internal
17 compliance reporting mechanism. Ms. Dawson availed herself of the Microsoft Employee
18 Survey where she officially reported what she reasonably believed to be discriminatory and
19 unlawful employment practices.
20 4.14 After complaining about unlawful discrimination at Microsoft, Plaintiff was forced
21 to move out of US SMB team. Plaintiff was instructed to apply for Senior Business Program
22 Manager, Global Sales Innovation One Commercial Partner (OCP) in WWIS (Worldwide Inside
23 Sales team), and she began that role on June 14th 2017. Despite Plaintiff’s desire to retain her
24 pre-complaint position and career path, she continued her diligent and successful work for
25 Defendant in this new role. This was evidenced in September 2017 when Plaintiff’s new
26 supervisor, Katie Spring, described Plaintiff’s work as follows: “You would never know Jen was

206-236-2769
1 new to this role, team or business model. She hit the ground running from day one. I have been
2 incredibly impressed with how quickly she reached out to the OCP (One commercial partner)
3 network and partnered with key inside sales folks to build a solid network of working relationship.
4 That collaboration was key to high impact in Q1. She worked very hard to leverage the work of
5 others where it existed and didn’t hesitate to lean and fill gaps. The quality and volume of work
6 Jen’s product has been really awesome. Fantastic impact. Jen you crushed Q1.”
7 4.15 Ms. Dawson continued to report the improper conduct. In June 2017 she
8 complained to Russ Madlener, SMB Senior Director, Marketing. In June 2017 Plaintiff followed
9 up with a written complaint to Elli Koulous, SMB Human Resources Manager. In August 2017
10 she complained to Angela Farso, WWIS Human Resources Manager.
11 4.16 After Ms. Dawson reported employer misconduct Defendant retaliated against her
12 for opposing what she reasonably believed to be discrimination on the basis of age, color and/or
13 race and sex. Microsoft failed to respond to Plaintiff’s reporting and took no action to stop the
14 alleged discrimination. Instead Defendant took adverse action against Plaintiff including
15 eliminating Plaintiff’s bonus awards in August 2017.
16 4.17 Plaintiff was subjected to the same unfair employment practices she had reported to
17 Senior Management and Human Resources. As part of Microsoft’s retaliation for reporting
18 employer misconduct, Ms. Dawson was subjected to disparate treatment on the basis of age, color
19 and/or race and sex.
20 4.18 Plaintiff was cut-out of company travel, and she suffered adverse action which
21 interfered with her ability to successfully perform job tasks.
22 4.19 A senior Microsoft manager told Ms. Dawson’s supervisor that “Indian women do
23 not understand American protocols.” The manager also instructed Plaintiff’s co-worker to keep
24 information away from her.
25 4.20 A senior Microsoft manager instructed a supervisor to “give Ms. Dawson the BMW
26 treatment.” At Microsoft BMW stood for Black Management Women.

206-236-2769
1 4.21 Plaintiff was made aware of untrue and damages statements about her that were
2 made by multiple members of management after she complained of discrimination. Defendant
3 took action to isolate Plaintiff, including cutting off Plaintiff’s access to senior management.
4 4.22 Plaintiff was denied promotions. Shortly before Plaintiff was terminated, she
5 applied for a Principal Program Manager position in the Azure networking team. Plaintiff was a
6 finalist for the position when she was informed that Yousef Khalidi denied her internal transfer
7 due to her color.
8 4.23 Microsoft unexpectedly terminated Ms. Dawson on October 1, 2018.
9 4.24 Microsoft falsely claimed that Plaintiff’s position was eliminated.
10 4.25 Microsoft replaced Ms. Dawson when they gave her job to a younger male
11 employee who was under 40 years of age. Tamim Chowdhury, who was mentored in part by
12 Plaintiff, was placed in Plaintiff’s position when Microsoft promoted him into Plaintiff’s job and
13 gave him the very same title held by Plaintiff prior to her termination. As Business Program
14 Manager, Global Sales Innovation, One Commercial Partner (OCP), Tamim Chowdhury
15 performs Ms. Dawson’s job functions.
16 4.26 Defendant’s retaliatory actions against Plaintiff, including terminating her, were
17 contrary to company policy and violated Washington State law.
18 4.27 As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s unlawful actions, Plaintiff has been
19 damaged in an amount to be determined at trial. The total amount of Plaintiff’s damages will be
20 determined at trial but are believed to exceed $5,000,000.00.
21 COUNT I, II, & III
22 (DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE WLAD – AGE, COLOR/RACE & GENDER)
23 5.1 Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
24 forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 4.24 above.
25 5.2 Plaintiff is 48-years old.
26 5.3 Plaintiff is an Indian American.

206-236-2769
1 5.4 Plaintiff is a female.
2 5.5 The WLAD prohibits discrimination in employment. Through RCW 49.60.180 the
3 Legislature declared that refusing to hire, or discharging any person because of age, color and/or
4 sex constitutes an unlawful and unfair practice for any employer.
5 5.6 Plaintiff alleges disparate treatment on the basis of: 1) age, 2) color and/or race, and
6 3) sex. Defendant took adverse employment action against Plaintiff; and Ms. Dawson’s age,
7 color and/or race, and gender were substantial factors in Microsoft’s decision to take the adverse
8 action.
9 5.7 Defendant’s illegal acts discussed above violated RCW 49.60.180.
10 5.8 Plaintiff alleges that Defendant denied her promotions, and terminated her from her
11 job with Microsoft, because she was forty years of age or older, satisfying the limitation imposed
12 by RCW 49.60.205.
13 5.9 As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has been damaged
14 in an amount to be proven at trial.
15 COUNT IV
16 (RETALIATION AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWER)

19 6.2 RCW 49.60.210 declares it an unfair practice for any employer to discharge, expel,
20 or otherwise discriminate against any person because he or she has opposed any practices
21 forbidden by the WLAD.
22 6.3 Plaintiff was opposing what she reasonably believed to be discrimination on the
23 basis of age, color and/or race and gender, and a substantial factor in the decision to deny her
24 promotion and to terminate her, was Ms. Dawson opposing what she reasonably believed to be
25 unlawful discrimination.
26

206-236-2769
3 COUNT V
4 (BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING)
7 7.2 As in all contractual agreements, Microsoft was required to perform the obligations
8 contained in its contracts with Plaintiff in good faith. This duty requires the parties to cooperate
9 with each other so that each may obtain the full benefit of performance.
10 7.3 Defendant breached its duty of good faith through actions discussed above.
11 7.4 Defendant’s breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing directly and
12 proximately caused Plaintiff damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
13 COUNT VI
14 (WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY)
17 8.2 It is unlawful to terminate an employee in retaliation for reporting employer
18 misconduct. A substantial factor motivating Microsoft to terminate Ms. Dawson’s employment

19 was her reporting what she reasonably believed to be employer misconduct.
20 8.3 Policy-protected conduct caused Plaintiff’s termination, and Microsoft had no
21 overriding justification for terminating Plaintiff who was universally respected and regarded as a
22 top performer prior Microsoft retaliating against her.
25
26

206-236-2769
1
3 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
4 WHEREFORE, Dawson prays for relief as follows:
5 1. Judgment against Defendant on each of her claims;

6 2. An award of damages, including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future
7 earnings, and non-economic damages for mental and emotional distress, embarrassment,
8 humiliation and loss of enjoyment of life;
9 3. An award of pre-judgment interest on all liquidated amounts and an award of post-
10 judgment interest at the highest legal rate then applicable;
11 4. An award of Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, other expenses pursuant to RCW
12 49.60.030, and as otherwise allowed by law;
13 5. For such other and additional relief as the Court deems just and proper.
14
DATED this 4th day of February, 2019
15
16 Mercer Island Law Group, PLLC
17 By: _________________________
18 George O. Tamblyn #15429

Jason J. Gillis #52762
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

206-236-2769

Dawson v. Microsoft

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Dawson v. Microsoft

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

1 FILED

2019 FEB 05 09:00 AM

8 CHRISTILDA JENEPHER DAWSON, CASE NO.:

9 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

12 II. THE PARTIES

13 2.1 Plaintiff Christilda Dawson is a former employee of Defendant Microsoft. She is a

18 2.2 Defendant Microsoft Corporation is a Washington corporation registered to do

21 Defendant conducted business.

22 III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

2 4.1 Ms. Dawson is a 48-year old Indian American.

3 4.2 Plaintiff is an industrious and professionally successful mother of two.

7 of Excellence Gold Club in her first year of service.

8 4.4 In recognition of Plaintiff’s excellent performance, and as a promotion, Defendant

13 compliance, audit and ROI reporting, and comprehensive relationship management.

16 team. In addition to awards, Defendant’s recognition of Plaintiff’s tremendous performance

17 during this period included: a promotion, a performance-based merit increase, a performance-

20 4.6 In December 2015 Defendant provided Plaintiff with outstanding performance

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

2 recognizes leadership and commitment to partner satisfaction.

8 4.9 In addition to Plaintiff’s stellar performance on core job responsibilities, Plaintiff

13 securing the highest participation numbers.

14 4.10 Plaintiff always sought out “microvolunteering” opportunities, including donating

20 4.11 In November 2016 Defendant again provided Plaintiff with outstanding

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

7 reasonably believed to be discriminatory acts by employer Microsoft, undertaken on the basis of

9 employment. A member of Microsoft senior management instructed a Microsoft hiring manager

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

10 she complained to Angela Farso, WWIS Human Resources Manager.

15 eliminating Plaintiff’s bonus awards in August 2017.

21 interfered with her ability to successfully perform job tasks.

24 information away from her.

26 treatment.” At Microsoft BMW stood for Black Management Women.

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

2 made by multiple members of management after she complained of discrimination. Defendant

7 due to her color.

8 4.23 Microsoft unexpectedly terminated Ms. Dawson on October 1, 2018.

9 4.24 Microsoft falsely claimed that Plaintiff’s position was eliminated.

15 performs Ms. Dawson’s job functions.

17 contrary to company policy and violated Washington State law.

20 determined at trial but are believed to exceed $5,000,000.00.

21 COUNT I, II, & III

22 (DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE WLAD – AGE, COLOR/RACE & GENDER)

24 forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 4.24 above.

25 5.2 Plaintiff is 48-years old.

26 5.3 Plaintiff is an Indian American.

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

4 sex constitutes an unlawful and unfair practice for any employer.

9 5.7 Defendant’s illegal acts discussed above violated RCW 49.60.180.

14 in an amount to be proven at trial.

16 (RETALIATION AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWER)

18 forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 5.9 above.

21 forbidden by the WLAD.

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC

2 in an amount to be proven at trial.

4 (BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING)

6 forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 6.4 above.

12 proximately caused Plaintiff damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

14 (WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY)

16 forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 7.4 above.

17 8.2 It is unlawful to terminate an employee in retaliation for reporting employer

18 misconduct. A substantial factor motivating Microsoft to terminate Ms. Dawson’s employment

20 8.3 Policy-protected conduct caused Plaintiff’s termination, and Microsoft had no

22 top performer prior Microsoft retaliating against her.

24 in an amount to be proven at trial.

MERCER ISLAND LAW GROUP, PLLC