IBJNews

Fired St. Vincent physician suing hospital for discrimination

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An Indian-born physician fired by St. Vincent Health is suing the hospital network in federal court on charges of discrimination and harassment.

Seema Nayak filed her lawsuit on Wednesday and is seeking past and future pay, in addition to other damages for the hospital’s “malicious and/or reckless conduct."

St. Vincent officials were not immediately available to comment.

Nayak’s suit follows a complaint she filed in October 2010 with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which granted her the right to sue in March. Her employment contract was not renewed by the hospital in June 2010.

She began her first-year residency program at St. Vincent in July 2007, in the obstetrics and gynecology department.

Though Nayak exceeded performance standards during her first- and second-year residencies, according to the suit, she became the target of discrimination from other residents due to her accent and Indian origin.

Nayak reported the harassment to the director of the hospital’s OB/GYN residency program, who advised her to accept more work to win the favor of other residents, the suit said.

The hospital also required Nayak to work with a cultural coach, who, after a few sessions, indicated that further coaching was unnecessary, the complaint said.

In the meantime, Nayak began experiencing physical impairments related to her pregnancy, which led to negative work evaluations. In May 2009, she was placed on complete bed rest. Three months later, one of her unborn twins died, according to the suit.

While in the hospital, Nayak said she was pressured to return to work as soon as possible and was granted six weeks' leave instead of the hospital’s customary eight-week maternity leave. St. Vincent, however, ultimately granted her the eight weeks on the insistence of Nayak’s physician, the complaint said.

Nayak returned to work in December 2009 and was immediately placed on a difficult residency rotation and placed under the supervision of a physician with whom she had previous conflicts, according to court documents.

In January 2010, Nayak was placed on probation and she was terminated the following May.

Nayak appealed to the hospital’s residency education committee and narrowly lost due to what she believes was a manipulation of the voting process in which her supporters were underrepresented.

“St. Vincent made it impossible for Dr. Nayak to perform her job to St. Vincent’s satisfaction because it refused to reasonably accommodate her disability and instead imposed unrealistic conditions upon her employment,” her suit said.

Nayak also is suing St. Vincent for retaliation.

She is represented by lawyers at the local firm of Betz+Blevins.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Bigoted St V's
    St V's will only treat you with dignity and respect if you are white and hetrosexual popping out babies in an over-populated planet. Don't go there if your not white unless you want to be ignored or end up pushing a broom for a living.
  • lets hear the other side of the story
    I would appreciated knowing the other side of the story which is, does she have an Indian accent which is difficult to understand, is she an H1B Visa or Green Card holder or actual U.S. citizen for this position, and did she adjust to the culture of the majority of the other Physicians or try to superimpose an Indian culture within her work. In America, she cannot use Indian cultural standards as the norm, but must adjust to meet our culture, not her Indian heritage culture, especially in the workplace/hospital and not with mostly U.S./American patients.
  • Only the Parties Involved Know What Happened, and They Only Know What They Saw or Heard
    I just think it is best to wait and let the process unfold.

    Her legal complaint by its very nature is written by her attorney to present the most favorable alleged facts in the most favorable light to support her suit.

    Similarly, the hospital's response will contain the most favorable alleged facts presented in the most favorable manner to support their position.

    Only a judge or jury (or in some situations a third-party arbiter) who gets to see all the evidence presented, including hearing the witnesses, etc, would be any position to make a valid determination about the merits of the case.

    Everyone else is speculating based on on a few paragraphs reported second-hand in a news article (which itself has been edited and drafted to present just a quick overview of what is alleged).
  • seriously
    Either Joyce and Kellie are not actually women or just ignorant. Any woman who has had pregnancy complications knows how dabilitating those complcations can be. And it was the cultural coach who said she did not need any more lessons, she did not give herself the OK. And what type of cultural lessons would she need anyway in regards to having a strong accent- maybe more english practice but it doesn't appear they fired her for being insensitive to patients.
    • I doubt it!
      It sounds to me that the hospital was only acting on issues that may have come up in regards to her continuing to be coached, just because she feels as if she doesn't need it doesn't mean she don't. I was just recently a patient at St. Vincent and I was treated with such care and respect, not just in the emergency room but even over the phone when I called the nurse helpline, this is a hospital that puts its patients first and as for her being asked to work a certain shift that she claimed to be "difficult" for her sounds to me like she just wants things her way. In today's world, women want to be in the workforce just like the men but then they want to turn around and ask for special treatment if they decide to start a family...look ladies, you can not have your cake and eat it too, and I don't think that I would want her as my doctor at all.
    • pregnancy
      The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) forbids discrimination based on pregnancy when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, such as leave and health insurance, and any other term or condition of employment. (http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/pregnancy.cfm)

    • Suit
      Pregnancy is a disability?

      Post a comment to this story

      COMMENTS POLICY
      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
       
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
       
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
       
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
       
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
       

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
       
      Subscribe to IBJ
      1. liek the rest of America

      2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

      3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

      4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

      5. whoa!

      ADVERTISEMENT