Cases Against Hopkins Hinge on Definition of “Employee”

The employment discrimination lawsuit against the City of Hopkins filed by former clerks Krystal Bowen and Teddy Phipps hinges around the definition of “Employee” under the Missouri Human Rights Act.

On January 27th, the former clerks filed a lawsuit alleging employment discrimination and retaliation. They are represented by Robert Murphy of St. Joseph. On March 13th, the city, represented by Jill Frost of Kansas City, filed an answer arguing that since the city never had six or more employees at the time of these actions, the law does not apply. They filed a motion to dismiss.

On March 24th, the plaintiffs filed findings in opposition to the motion to dismiss. They argue that the City actually had 10 employees during the events in question. They also allege that the City was an “Employer” as defined by RSMo. 213.010 (8). 

The section in question states:

“"Employer", a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has six or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and shall include the state, or any political or civil subdivision thereof, or any person employing six or more persons within the state but does not include corporations and associations owned or operated by religious or sectarian organizations.  "Employer" shall not include:

  (a)  The United States;

  (b)  A corporation wholly owned by the government of the United States;

  (c)  An individual employed by an employer;

  (d)  An Indian tribe;

  (e)  Any department or agency of the District of Columbia subject by statute to procedures of the competitive service, as defined in 5 U.S.C. Section 2101; or

  (f)  A bona fide private membership club, other than a labor organization, that is exempt from taxation under 26 U.S.C. Section 501(c)””

On April 10th, the City filed an answer arguing that under Rule 55.03 (b) (3), the plaintiffs certified that the allegations have evidentiary support or are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. The City argues that plaintiffs have failed to provide evidentiary support for their claim that the City had 10 employees during the events in question.

“Missouri is a fact-pleading state. A petition must allege facts to support each essential element of the case to be pleaded,” argued Frost on behalf of the City. Therefore, Frost argued, “Plaintiff’s bald assertion listing the number of employees at 10 is insufficient.” She concluded, “Plaintiff has failed to factually support that Defendant had six or more employees.”