Frias v. Viasat Amended Complaint

1
2
3
4
MARGARITA FRIAS
SIESTA DRIVE
OCEANSIDE CA 92057
(760) 681-8639
Plaintiff,
5
6
7
8
9
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO NORTH COUNTY DIVISION
11
12
MARGARITA FRIAS
13
Plaintiff,
14
vs.
15
16
17
18
VIASAT INC., SCOTT HANNUM

PRODUCTION SUPERVISOR FOR
VIASAT, HUMAN RESOURCE
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER,
CAREY GUYETTE MANUFACTURING
ENGINEERING TECH. DOE 1 through
100
19
20
Defendants,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE No.: ADJ9883327 J
AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR

WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN
VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
21
22
23
24
25
26
JURISDICTION
Plaintiff, MARGARITA FRIAS is and at all times herein mentioned was a resident of the
County of San Diego, State of California.
Plaintiff, is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times herein mentioned
27
ViaSat Inc. is, and at all times mentioned in this complaint was, a company located in the County
28
of San Diego, a global broadband services and technology Company with US Government and
Amended Complaint for Wrongful Termination
1-
Military Contracts organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, conducting
activities in the County of San Diego, State of California, other states and Internationally.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times mentioned herein,
each of the individual defendants at all times mentioned herein reside and were employees within
the county of San Diego, State of California.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times mentioned herein,
each individual defendant was the agent, servant, or employee of ViaSat Inc. and was at all times
herein mentioned acting within the course of scope of their employment.
Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities of defendants sued herein as DOE 1-
10
100, inclusive, and therefore sues such DOE defendants by such fictitious names pursuant to
11
California Code Civ. 474. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to allege their true names and
12
capacities when ascertained.
13
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each fictitiously named defendant
14
is responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged and plaintiffs injuries and
15
damages as herein alleged are directly, proximately and/or legally caused by defendants and all of
16
their acts.
17
Plaintiff is informed and believes and therein alleges that each of these defendants named
18
herein as DOES are the agents, employers, representatives or employees of the other named
19
defendants and when performing the acts alleged herein, were acting within the scope of their
20
agency or employment and/or representative capacity and are therefore responsible for the acts
21
complained of herein.
22
Plaintiffs charges of employment discrimination are filed with the State of California
23
Workers Compensation Board EAMS Case No. ADJ9883327 Employment Discrimination
24
pursuant to Labor Code 132 (a).
25
Plaintiff was hired by ViaSat Inc. in 1997 and worked as a Prototype Lead Assembler until
26
her employment was terminated by ViaSat Inc. on January 19, 2016. At all times pertinent to this
27
complaint, Plaintiff was employed by defendant and was a loyal and competent employee. Each
28
and every year Plaintiff received positive performance evaluations.

2-
1
2
THE PARTIES
VIASAT Inc. is an American military and commercial communications company. ViaSat, is
a DBS distributor and TV broadcaster, ViaSat Inc. is a communications company based
in Carlsbad, California, with additional operations across the United States and worldwide.
ViaSat is a provider of high-speed satellite broadband services and secure networking systems
covering military and commercial markets. ViaSat is ranked on the SpaceNews Top 50 space
companies and is also included on the Defense News list of Top 100 defense companies. ViaSat
owns and operates Exede Internet, a satellite Internet provider for over 657,000
households. ViaSat launched its satellite, ViaSat-1, in 2011, and its second satellite, ViaSat-2, will
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
launch in 2016.
SCOTT HANNUM PRODUCTION SUPERVISOR FOR VIASAT, referred herein after
as, SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM.
HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER, referred herein after as
CANDICE BRENNER
CAREY GUYETTE MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING TECH referred herein after
as CAREY GUYETTE.
MARGARITA FRIAS LEAD PHOTOTYPE ASSEMBLER refereed herein after as
Plaintiff.
19
20
STATEMENT OF FACTS
21
Plaintiff had a work related injury on February 3, 2011 and made a Workers Compensation
22
Claim Number 095 CB ELL2080 J. Workmans comp representative for the above case number is
23
Cinzia Carusso, 651-310-7259 / 877-389-4682 / CDCARUSO@TRAVELERS.COM
24
Representative Cinzia sent Plaintiff to US Healthworks Medical Group to receive treatment
25
for her injury. Plaintiff was sent to QTC to have the injury evaluated and back to work with
26
restrictions. Plaintiff asked her immediate supervisor if she needed to submit documentation of
27
the restrictions. Plaintiffs supervisor Bryan Bloom said there were no documentation required
28
just to let him know what the restrictions were. On or about the beginning of 2014 Plaintiffs
3-
supervisor Bryan Bloom was terminated. Plaintiffs department did not have a supervisor for
about five months.
The new SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM demanded, Plaintiff do projects that were out
of her physical range and beyond her restrictions. Plaintiff informed her supervisor that she had
medical physical restrictions.
Plaintiff asked her coworkers for assistance, the coworkers agreed to assist Plaintiff with
the cable projects an area plaintiff needed help with. The cable projects were physically
strenuous. Other coworkers offered to assist Plaintiff but SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM
placed the coworkers in other projects so that the coworkers would not assist Plaintiff.
10
SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM continued to deny the doctors order for work
11
accommodations for Plaintiff. Plaintiff suffered permanent physically damage performing the
12
tasks outside her limitations due to SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM refusal to comply with the
13
doctors orders for disability accommodations. As Plaintiff needed to complete her tasks and
14
projects that were in high demand and priority for ViaSat Inc.
15
Plaintiff was called into the office by SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, CANDICE
16
BRENNER HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST was present in the office. Plaintiff was given a
17
letter of notification stating that Plaintiff was disobedient in carrying out her supervisors orders.
18
Plaintiff was accused of sending letters to program managers stating that SUPERVISOR SCOTT
19
HANNUM was not able to provide assistance for the project. CANDICE BRENNER stated that,
20
she was there to support supervisor Hamilton, while SUPERVISOR HANNUM stated that,
21
the allegations against Plaintiff did not happen as written in the letter. CANDICE BRENNER
22
was fully aware of Plaintiffs disability and need for accommodations and had the documentation
23
on file.
24
Afterwards SUPERVISOR HANNUM told Plaintiff that she did not provide the
25
information about her disability to him. Plaintiff told SUPERVISOR HANNUM that she had the
26
information and the information was provided to ViaSat Inc. In the 18-years at ViaSat Inc.
27
Plaintiff had three related Workers Compensation injuries, the accommodations were established
28
for years and well known to ViaSat Inc.

4-
After the meeting CANDICE BRENNER and Plaintiff went to a different office. Plaintiff
told CANDICE BRENNER that SUPERVISOR HANNUM was demanding Plaintiff to do tasks
that she could not physically do. After Plaintiff had informed SUPERVISOR HANNUM over and
over that she had a disability and task limitations.
Plaintiff told CANDICE BRENNER that she needed assistance to complete the tasks.
CANDICE BRENNER said, all right lets go talk to supervisor Hannum. Plaintiff asked
CANDICE BRENNER not to have a discussion about the issue at that moment. Plaintiff informed
Human Resource Specialist CANDICE BRENNER that she had the conversation about her
disability limitation over ten times with SUPERVISOR HANNUM and Plaintiff had repeatedly
10
asked for accommodations and assistance. Plaintiff was never provided with the proper tools that
11
she needed to complete the tasks that further her injury. Plaintiff had to compensate with other
12
tools that intensified her injuries.
13
ENGINEERING TECH was responsible for ordering needed tools and work equipment for ViaSat
14
Inc. employees.
15
Employee CAREY GUYETTE MANUFACTURING
CAREY GUYETTE maliciously refused to order the proper tools for Plaintiff. Plaintiff had
16
to ask CAREY GUYETTE for the tools many times and there were either never provided or
17
provided many months later. However, CAREY GUYETTE provided the tools requested by other
18
coworkers within two days. Plaintiff had to email her supervisors and complain that CAREY
19
GUYETTE refused to order the tools Plaintiff needed to complete the tasks. In the meantime
20
Plaintiff had to finish the projects assigned to her compensating with other tools that were not
21
comparable with the needed tools. CAREY GUYETTE malicious actions caused Plaintiff further
22
physical injury.
23
Plaintiff suggested to Candice Brenner they had the discussion the following day when
24
Plaintiff could bring the disability / limitations documentation with her. The following day
25
Plaintiff was provided with assistance to do her tasks. Plaintiff was handed a letter of reprimand
26
stating that Plaintiff was insubordinate. Plaintiff was asked to sign the letter and she declined
27
because most of the allegations in the letter were not true and Plaintiff wanted to include a rebuttal
28

5-
in writing. Human Resource Specialist Candice Banner said it did not matter anyways and she
was going to sign it herself and place it on my work folder.
ViaSat Inc. employees had half of December off on Company vacation and when Plaintiff
returned to work in January 2015, Plaintiff assumed everything was fine. On January 19, 2015
Plaintiff was called into the office by Human Resource Specialist Candice Brenner. Plaintiff was
told that everyone was supposed to have a review. Plaintiff was informed that she was no longer a
fit to the company and Plaintiff could no longer do the job because she was not able to keep up
with ViaSat Inc.
In the 18-years Plaintiff worked for ViaSat Inc. Plaintiff had outstanding reviews and got
10
bonuses. Plaintiff was an exemplary employee up to the point where Plaintiffs work related
11
injuries accumulated and she needed accommodations/ limitations to perform some of the tasks.
12
In these 18-years plaintiff worked for ViaSat Inc. Plaintiff had never had any negative
13
complaints, comments, letters, or reprimands. Plaintiff asked Human Resource Specialist Candice
14
Banner if Plaintiff was being let go because she had a work related injury and needed
15
accommodations. Human Resource Candice Banner answered and said, she talked to Plaintiffs
16
coworkers, they all agreed with the decision to let her go.
17
At this point Human Resource Specialist Candice Banner began to cry. Plaintiff looked at
18
Candice Banner and said, thats ok Candice I know that you too have to eat, so I guess someone
19
has to do this job. Plaintiff was given a termination package where Plaintiff was offered Cobra
20
and severance pay for several months. To be able to get the severance pay package Plaintiff was
21
asked to sign a letter stating that she did not have current work related injuries and that Plaintiff
22
was not going to sue ViaSat Inc. for any reason whatsoever.
23
Plaintiff did not agree she did not have current work related injuries as stated in ViaSat Inc.
24
Severance Package / Offer Letter. If Plaintiff refused to sign the Severance Package / Offer Letter,
25
Plaintiff would not get her severance pay. Plaintiff was ordered not to speak to any employee as
26
to what had occurred.
27
28
Plaintiff did not sign the letter because she had a current Workers Compensation injury
that was pending. From the time SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM was hired, Plaintiff was put
6-
under a microscope, Plaintiff was subjected to extreme stress and hostility by SUPERVISOR
SCOTT HANNUM who was angry, in rage, his entire face flushed when he approached Plaintiff.
As a result Plaintiff has lost wages, severance pay, medical benefits, severe emotional stress and
harm to her well-being.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy)
(AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS and DOES 1-50)
Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in the
preceding paragraphs as through fully set forth herein.
ViaSat Inc. and its Supervising employees failed to accommodate Plaintiffs disability in
12
violation of Californias Fair Employment and Housing Act. Cal, Gov. Code 12900 et. Seq.
13
ViaSat Inc. failed to train employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
14
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE to comply with Employment and
15
Housing Act. Cal, Gov. Code 12900 et. Seq. as a result of ViaSat Inc. negligence, lack of
16
training and anti-discrimination enforcement policies SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM,
17
HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GGUYETTE freely
18
and willfully violated Plaintiffs rights to accommodations and anti-discrimination under
19
Employment and Housing Act. Cal, Gov. Code 12900 et. Seq.
20
ViaSat Inc. failed to accommodate and train its employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT
21
HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY
22
GUYETTE to comply with the Americans with Disability Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12111, et. Seq.
23
as a result of ViaSat negligence and lack of compliance with government regulations
24
SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER
25
and CAREY GUYETTE freely and willfully violated plaintiffs rights for disability
26
accommodations and anti-discrimination
27
in violation of Americans with Disability Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12111, et. Seq.
28

7-
The ADA Title I requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide qualified
individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from the full range of employment-
related opportunities available to others including compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities and Rehabilitation and anti-discrimination protections under both state and federal
law.
ViaSat Inc. falls within the confinement of the Regulations under the American with
Disabilities Act. With more than 3,700 employees globally and obtaining a great majority of US
Government Contracts for engineering & proposal support to defense prime contractors bidding
satellite programs.1 As a Lead Prototype Assembler Plaintiff assisted in ALL of these programs.
10
Plaintiff worked at ViaSat Inc. from the infancy of this company. Plaintiff had direct
11
contact with US Generals regarding Government Projects. The success of ViaSat Inc. stems from
12
the hard work and backbone of devoted loyal employees like Plaintiff.
13
Plaintiff worked at ViaSat Inc. site located 6155 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92009,
14
under California employment discrimination law which covers nearly all employers. An
15
"employer" for purposes of the FEHA includes anyone regularly employing five or more persons,
16
whether full or part-time; any person acting as an agent of an employer, directly or indirectly; state
17
and local governments; employment agencies; and labor organizations. (Gov. Code, 12926, subd.
18
(d)).
19
20
ViaSat Inc. and its employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE violated plaintiffs rights when all
21
22
See more at: https://www.viasat.com/about/company-history#sthash.3Wf71CUl.dpuf

ViaSat inc. began trading as a public company on the Nasdaq Stock Market in December 1996
under the symbol VSAT. Communications for the Network-Centric Military
Our initial successes in defense and government related communication products continue today in
our Government Systems Division. We provide systems and services for military satcom;
MIDS/Link-16 tactical communications; unmanned system video data links; data messaging for IP
networking to the tactical edge; RF communication simulation; and secure networking for
encrypting both data communications and data storage within non-secure networks."
23
24
25
26
27
28

8-
above defendants refused to accommodate, harassed, retaliated and unlawfully terminated
plaintiffs employment. In violation of the FEHA and ADA regulations.
As a result of all of defendants egregious conspiratorial actions against Plaintiff, and
violations of California regulations and anti- discrimination codes Plaintiff has suffered irreparable
physical harm, loss of wages and emotional distress.
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE engaged in unlawful
discrimination against Plaintiff based on her disability in violation of FEHA Government Codes
including Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
10
11
As a result of these above mentioned egregious violations Plaintiff has lost wages, severance
pay, medical benefits, severe emotional stress and harm to her well-being.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Civil Conspiracy to Wrongful Termination and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in the
19
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE denied and ignored Plaintiffs
20
doctors and Plaintiffs request for a reasonable disability accommodation in doing heavy strenuous
21
projects. ViaSat Inc. and SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
22
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE violated Plaintiffs rights for
23
accommodations under the American with Disabilities Act, "ADA". The ADA requires ViaSat
24
Inc. and its management to provide its employers with reasonable accommodations after they
25
sustain an injury at the job. ViaSat Inc. is also obligated to provide reasonable accommodations to
26
employees with disabilities.
27
Accommodating an employee means providing assistance or making changes to the job or
28
workplace that would allow the employee to do the job despite having a disability. Instead of a
9-
disability accommodations ViaSat Inc., SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE conspired and
resorted to retaliatory acts and harassment against Plaintiff by refusing to provide accommodations
/ limitations with the heavy cable projects, and by not ordering the appropriate required tools.
Instead of compliance with the ADA and the Rehabilitation guidelines Plaintiff was terminated on
January 19, 2015 in violation of FEHA. 2
7
8
As a result of these above mentioned violations Plaintiff has lost wages, severance pay,
medical benefits, severe emotional stress and harm to her well-being.
9
10
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
11
(Conspiracy to Terminate Plaintiffs Employment Instead of Complying
12
With Disability Accommodations)
13
14
15
16
ViaSat. Inc., SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST
17
CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE denied and ignored Plaintiffs doctors and her
18
requests for reasonable disability accommodation. In the 18-years Plaintiff worked for ViaSat Inc.
19
Plaintiff sustained permanent damages and injuries not only limited to and diagnosed as damage
20
to: Radiculopathy lumber region, Chronic pain syndrome, Radiculopathy cervical region,
21
Bursitis of shoulder, Neuralgia and neuritis, Radiculopathy that originates form the lower back,
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) protects the right of individuals to seek, obtain,
and hold employment without discrimination on the basis of physical or mental disability or
medical condition. It also prohibits retaliation against a person who has opposed unlawful
discriminatory practices under the FEHA or participated in an investigation into unlawful
employment practices. (Gov. Code, 12940, subd. (h).) The FEHA also prohibits harassment on the
basis of a persons disability. (Gov. Code, 12940, subd. (j).)
In addition to the FEHA, there are a number of other California laws that protect disabled
employees (Gov. Code, 19230 et seq.) Also, any program or activity funded by the state must not
discriminate against persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, 11135 et seq.)
10-
Rotator cuff, supraspinatus tendon, Biceps tendonitis. All this injuries are tolled per California
Codes Collier v. City of Pasadena (1983) 142 Cal. App. 3d 917, 924-926; Myers v. County of
Orange (1970) 6 CA3d 626, 634. Plaintiff has on file several Workers Compensation claims.
ViaSat Inc. and its supervising employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE were at all times
fully aware of Plaintiff physical disabilities and limitations she acquired while working at ViaSat
Inc. heavy projects.
ViaSat Inc. and its supervising employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE failed to make
10
accommodations for Plaintiffs disability in violation of the American with Disabilities Act,
11
"ADA". The ADA requires ViaSat Inc. and its management to provide its employers with
12
reasonable accommodations after they sustain an injury on the job. ViaSat Inc. is also obligated to
13
provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities. Accommodating an employee
14
means providing assistance or making changes to the job or workplace that would allow the
15
employee to do the job despite having a disability. Instead of a disability accommodations ViaSat
16
Inc. and its supervising employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
17
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE resorted to retaliatory acts by
18
refusing to provide accommodations / limitations with the heavy cable projects or ordering the
19
proper tools to do the requested projects. Instead of compliance with the ADA and the
20
Rehabilitation guidelines defendants SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMANRESOURCE
21
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER terminated Plaintiff employment on January 19, 2015. 3
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) protects the right of individuals to seek, obtain,
and hold employment without discrimination on the basis of physical or mental disability or
medical condition. It also prohibits retaliation against a person who has opposed unlawful
discriminatory practices under the FEHA or participated in an investigation into unlawful
employment practices. (Gov. Code, 12940, subd. (h).) The FEHA also prohibits harassment on
the basis of a persons disability. (Gov. Code, 12940, subd. (j).)
In addition to the FEHA, there are a number of other California laws that protect disabled
employees (Gov. Code, 19230 et seq.) Also, any program or activity funded by the state must not
discriminate against persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, 11135 et seq.)
11-
1
2
3
4
5
1. ViaSat Inc. and its employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE engaged in unlawful
discrimination based on Plaintiffs disability in violation of FEHA Government Codes
including Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE retaliated against Plaintiff
in violation of FEHA Government Codes Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
6
7
8
9
10
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GAYETTE failed to accommodate
Plaintiffs disabilities in violation of FEHA Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE failed to train Plaintiff to
do another job within the company in violation of FEHA Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE failed to engage in an
interacted process and terminated Plaintiff in violation of FEHA Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.
6. ViaSat Inc. and its supervising employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE violated the
ADA when ViaSat Inc. and its employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE retaliated
against Plaintiff, failed to make reasonable accommodations or retrain Plaintiff, humiliated
Plaintiff in front of her coworkers and then terminated Plaintiff employment. ADA
prohibits discrimination or retaliation against anyone who has opposed acts or practices
unlawful under the ADA, has asserted a claim under the ADA, or has assisted in the
assertion of such a claim by acting as a witness or aiding in the investigation of ADA
violations. (42 U.S.C. 12203.)
20
21
Employers Must Reasonably Accommodate Disabilities
22
ViaSat In. and its supervising employees SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN
23
RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE violated Federal
24
Government Contract Requirement of anti-Disability Discrimination when ViaSat Inc. subjected
25
Plaintiff to discrimination, retaliation, failed to accommodate Plaintiffs disability, retrain Plaintiff
26
and terminated Plaintiff in violations of both state and federal laws. The Office of Federal
27
Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) of the Department of Labor has developed regulations
28
for complying with this law, located in Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act. (29 U.S.C. 793; 41
C.F.R. 60-741 et seq.)
12-
Federal Contractors
All government contractors and subcontractors with contracts of $10,000 or more must take
affirmative action in hiring and promoting otherwise qualified individuals with disabilities.
ViaSat Inc. has obtained large government contracts in Communications for the Network-Centric
Military Including but not limited to defense and government related communication products,
Government Systems Division. ViaSat Inc. provides systems and services for Military Satcom;
MIDS/Link-16 tactical communications; unmanned system video data links; data messaging for IP
networking to the tactical edge; RF communication simulation; and secure networking for
encrypting both data communications and data storage within non-secure networks." All inclusive
10
Government Contracts. Within the contracts ViaSat Inc. obtained there is a notice, agreement and
11
fiduciary compliance mandated with both State and Federal Government for anti-discrimination,
12
anti-relation, anti-harassment policies in the workplace.
13
ViaSat Inc. knew and should have known and should have trained all its supervisors and
14
employees and should have created policies; a fiduciary duty and compliance with the State FEHA
15
and federal ADA American with Disabilities Act. As a result of ViaSat Inc., SUPERVISOR
16
SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY
17
GUYETTE multiple violations of FEHA and ADA Plaintiff is suffering and will continue to suffer
18
irreparable and permanent damage both physically and emotionally. 4 In addition ViaSat Inc. has
19
an atmosphere of encouraging coworkers to harass disabled workers. Plaintiff sustain humiliation
20
and harassment by other coworkers as a result of ViaSat Inc. SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM,
21
22
23
Recipients of Federal Funds

The Rehabilitation Act is also designed to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability in
programs or activities which receive federal financial assistance. (29 U.S.C. 794.)
24
25
26
27
28
Protections
No "otherwise qualified" individual with a disability can, solely by reason of his or her disability,
be: 1) excluded from participation in, 2) be denied the benefits of, or 3) be subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal money or administered by a federal
agency. An otherwise qualified" individual with a disability is one who meets a program's
requirements in spite of his or her disability. However, a program may have to justify its
requirements by showing that they are valid and necessary. (29 U.S.C. 794; 28 C.F.R. 41.32.)
13-
HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE wrongful
conduct against Plaintiff, as on employee (Dan Roberts) harassed Plaintiff and asked her, if you
cannot do your job then why are you working here. ViaSat Inc. encouraged these derogatory
comments, harassment and humiliation by Plaintiffs peers. By HUMAN RESOURCE
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER own words she talked to Plaintiffs pears and that they all
agreed with the decision to let her go.
7
8
As a result of these above mentioned violations Plaintiff has lost wages, severance pay,
medical benefits, severe emotional stress and harm to her emotional and physical well-being.
9
10
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
11
(Exemplary and Punitive Damages)
12
13
14
15
Defendants ViaSat Inc. SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE
16
SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER ultimately authorized and ratified the discrimination,
17
retaliation, failure to accommodate Plaintiffs disability, and encouraged other employees of
18
ViaSat to harass Plaintiff based on her disability and requests for disability accommodations and
19
ultimately terminated Plaintiffs employment. Defendants further inflicted intentional and severe
20
emotional distress by asking her coworkers to vote on Plaintiffs termination due to her
21
disabilities. Plaintiff was informed by CANDICE BRENNER that each and every coworkers was
22
asked to eliminate a person who was not 100% able to contribute.
23
Plaintiff is informed and thereon alleges that all defendants knew or should have known of
24
the civil conspiracy which existed to wrongfully terminate Plaintiffs employment and
25
intentionally inflict severe emotional distress upon her. As a result of the civil conspiracy to
26
wrongfully terminate her employment, discriminate, harass, and failure to accommodate Plaintiffs
27
disabilities, Plaintiff has suffered economic physical damages, economic damages, represented by
28

14-
loss earnings and earning capacity, past and future employment and retirement benefits, and other
economic damages all in amount according to proof at the time of trial.
As a legal result of the civil conspiracy to wrongfully terminate Plaintiffs employment and
to intentionally inflict severe emotional distress upon her, Plaintiff has suffered noneconomic
damages including humiliation, anguish, mental and emotional distress, pain and suffering with
physical injuries, and other damages in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.
Plaintiff alleges that defendants, and each of them, conspired to and did wrongfully
terminate her employment and intentionally inflict severe emotional distress upon her with the
intent that she would suffer economic damages which Plaintiff alleges was egregious and
10
despicable conduct carried on by all defendants with a willful and conscious disregard of her
11
rights, and was intended to and did subject her to cruel and unjust hardship and conscious
12
disregard of her rights, thereby constitution malice and oppression as defined by Civ. Code
13
3294 entitling Plaintiff to an award of punitive and exemplary damages against SUPERVISOR
14
SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER, and CAREY
15
GUYETTE each of them in the amount according to proof at time of trial.
16
Because these said defendants authorized, ratified the wrongful termination of Plaintiffs
17
employment. Said defendants further asked coworkers if Plaintiff employment should be
18
terminated an intentional infliction of severe emotional distress, humiliation, in violations of state
19
and federal anti-discrimination and anti-retaliatory acts. Said defendants remain employed and
20
undisciplined by ViaSat Inc.
21
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment as follow:
22
23
1. For compensatory economic and non-economic damages in amount according to proof at

the time of trial;
24
2. For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount according to proof at the time of trial;
25
3. For such other and further relief that the court deems just and proper.
26
Dated:. July ____ 2016
______________________
27
28
Margarita Frias
15-
1
2
VERIFICATION
WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA
I have read the foregoing AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL

4
5
TERMINATION of FRIAS V. VIASAT INC. et. seq. and know its contents.
I am a party to this action. The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of my
own knowledge except as to those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to
those matters I believe them to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
10
11
foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
12
Executed on July ___, 2016 at Oceanside Ca, California.
13
14
_______________________________
Margarita Frias
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

16-
PROOF OR SERVICE
I, the undersigned, declare that I served the notice (s) bellow as indicated:
AMENDED COMPLAINT OF WRONFUL TERMINQTION of FRIAS V. VIASAT INC.
The above described notice (s) were served on the following named parties in the matter set forth
below:
Name (s) : ViaSat Inc., SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE

SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER & CAREY GUYETTE
Address : 6155 El Camino Real, Carlsbad CA 92009
Name (s) : CINZIA CARUSO, TRAVELERS SAINT PAUL
Address : 385 Washington ST MC SB05W, Saint Paul MN 55102
Name (s) : Mahdis Kaeni, Esq.
Address : 1516 N. Broadway, Santa Ana, CA 92706
Name (s) : Workers Compensation Appeals Board
Address : 605 W. Santa Ana Blvd. Bldg. 28, Ste. 451, Santa Ana CA 92057
7
8
9
10
11
12
[X]
1.
Personal Service
By delivering a copy of the notice (s) to
[ ]
2.
Constructive Service
each of the above personally:
13
14
[1]. On:_________________
15
[2]. At:__________________
16
[X]
4.
and thereafter mailing a copy to each said party by depositing said copies
17
by US Postal Mail on date: ____________ from city Oceanside CA in a

18
sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, addressed, to each said party at
19
the place where the property is situated or:

20
At the time of service I was over the age of 18 years of age, I declare under penalty of perjury that
21
the forgoing is true and correct.

22
Person who served the papers:

23
24
Name:
Address:
25
26
______________________________
_______________________
27
28

17-
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-

Frias v. Viasat Amended Complaint

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Frias v. Viasat Amended Complaint

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

1

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO NORTH COUNTY DIVISION

VIASAT INC., SCOTT HANNUM

CASE No.: ADJ9883327 J

AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR

the county of San Diego, State of California.

herein mentioned acting within the course of scope of their employment.

capacities when ascertained.

Workers Compensation Board EAMS Case No. ADJ9883327 Employment Discrimination

pursuant to Labor Code 132 (a).

and every year Plaintiff received positive performance evaluations.

a DBS distributor and TV broadcaster, ViaSat Inc. is a communications company based

Cinzia Carusso, 651-310-7259 / 877-389-4682 / CDCARUSO@TRAVELERS.COM

Representative Cinzia sent Plaintiff to US Healthworks Medical Group to receive treatment

about five months.

medical physical restrictions.

for years and well known to ViaSat Inc.

over that she had a disability and task limitations.

tools that intensified her injuries.

Employee CAREY GUYETTE MANUFACTURING

Amended Complaint for Wrongful Termination

was going to sign it herself and place it on my work folder.

with ViaSat Inc.

to what had occurred.

harm to her well-being.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

training and anti-discrimination enforcement policies SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM,

HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GGUYETTE freely

and willfully violated Plaintiffs rights to accommodations and anti-discrimination under

HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY

as a result of ViaSat negligence and lack of compliance with government regulations

SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER

accommodations and anti-discrimination

Amended Complaint for Wrongful Termination

See more at: https://www.viasat.com/about/company-history#sthash.3Wf71CUl.dpuf

Amended Complaint for Wrongful Termination

above defendants refused to accommodate, harassed, retaliated and unlawfully terminated

plaintiffs employment. In violation of the FEHA and ADA regulations.

As a result of all of defendants egregious conspiratorial actions against Plaintiff, and

physical harm, loss of wages and emotional distress.

SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE engaged in unlawful

including Sec. (s) 12940 et. seq.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

projects. ViaSat Inc. and SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE

employees with disabilities.

Accommodating an employee means providing assistance or making changes to the job or

disability accommodations ViaSat Inc., SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN

RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE conspired and

January 19, 2015 in violation of FEHA. 2

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Conspiracy to Terminate Plaintiffs Employment Instead of Complying

With Disability Accommodations)

(AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS and DOES 1-50)

ViaSat. Inc., SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST

Inc. heavy projects.

RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE failed to make

provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities. Accommodating an employee

SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE resorted to retaliatory acts by

Rehabilitation guidelines defendants SUPERVISOR SCOTT HANNUM, HUMANRESOURCE

SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER terminated Plaintiff employment on January 19, 2015. 3

Employers Must Reasonably Accommodate Disabilities

RESOURCE SPECIALIST CANDICE BRENNER and CAREY GUYETTE violated Federal

Government Contract Requirement of anti-Disability Discrimination when ViaSat Inc. subjected