United States District Court, D. Kansas
JEROME A. CHRISTMON, Plaintiff,
B&B AIRPARTS, INC., Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MURGUIA United States District Judge
Jerome A. Christmon, a former employee of defendant B&B
Airparts, Inc., brings this action pro se-claiming that
defendant violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
by failing to accommodate plaintiff's request to change
his standard day off from Saturday of each week to Sunday.
Plaintiff made the request because of his religious beliefs
as a Hebrew Israelite. Defendant claims that it offered
plaintiff a reasonable accommodation by allowing plaintiff to
take off Saturdays without penalty, even when plaintiff did
not complete Request for Time Off forms in accordance with
policy. The case is before the court on defendant's
motion for summary judgment (Doc. 32). For the following
reasons, the court grants the motion.
facts below are taken largely from defendant's motion for
summary judgment. Plaintiff filed a response to
defendant's motion, but did not properly controvert the
facts presented. Instead, he spent most of his response
arguing that revisions to his deposition were ignored and
that defendant did not include the court reporter's
certification with the deposition transcripts that it filed
in support of its summary judgment motion. Plaintiff cannot
substantively alter his deposition testimony with an errata
sheet. See Burn v. Bd. of Cty. Comm'rs of Jackson
Cty., 330 F.3d 1275, 1282 (10th Cir. 2003). And
defendant did not need to file the court reporter's
certification. See D. Kan. R. 56.1(d); Zhu v.
Countrywide Realty, Co., 165 F.Supp.2d 1181, 1194-95 (D.
Kan. 2001). Neither of plaintiff's arguments provide a
valid basis for disregarding the uncontroverted facts
presented by defendant.
worked as a simple assembly worker in defendant's sheet
metal assembly department from October 20, 2014 through
February 11, 2016. Roseann Payne supervised plaintiff.
Hebrew Israelite, plaintiff observes Saturday as the Sabbath.
During his interview with Payne (which was to hire plaintiff
as a temporary employee), plaintiff told Payne, “I was
serious about my faith and that I would be requesting days
and stuff off for my faith.” But plaintiff also told
Payne that he was available for any shift. After the
interview, plaintiff felt like defendant would accommodate
his religious requests.
plaintiff completed a temporary placement with defendant,
Payne hired him as a full-time employee. Around the time of
his hire, plaintiff signed an acknowledgement that he had
received a copy of defendant's employee manual and that
he was responsible for reading and complying with its
policies. The manual emphasizes the importance of daily
attendance, requiring employees to complete a Request for
Time Off form if they need time off from work. The manual
also states that the scheduling of employee hours is based on
many factors, including customer contracts, project due
dates, the assembly work of the specific employee, and
employee efficiency. It further states that work demands can
change based on a number of unpredictable factors. The
employee manual addresses overtime, providing that employees
who do not work mandatory scheduled shifts are subject to
the relevant time period, defendant's sheet metal
assembly employees worked two shifts: (1) a Monday through
Friday first shift that started between 5 a.m. and 6 a.m. and
ran through 3:30 p.m.; and (2) a second shift from 3 p.m. to
1:30 a.m. Defendant expected its Monday through Friday
employees to work certain Saturdays. Defendant also had also
a weekend shift for just a few employees. The weekend shift
was 4 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Friday through Sunday.
in 2015, defendant experienced a customer order surge, and
therefore required employees to work mandatory overtime from
January 1, 2015 through August 16, 2015. During this period,
plaintiff and other small assembly workers had to work Monday
through Friday, as well as Saturdays from 5:00 a.m. or 6:00
a.m. to 11:00 a.m. or 12:00 p.m., depending on customer
needs, project due dates, and employee workload. Beginning on
August 17, 2015, mandatory overtime went to an as-needed
basis. From January 1, 2015, through August 17, 2015,
plaintiff was scheduled and worked the following Saturdays:
January 17, January 24, February 7, February 21, March 7, May
16, June 14, June 27, July 12, July 18, and July 26.
scheduled plaintiff to work on Saturday June 6, 2015, but
plaintiff did not show up for his shift that day. Under
defendant's policy, plaintiff received a written warning.
At the time of this discipline, plaintiff had not requested
the Sabbath off. Plaintiff claims that June 6, 2015 was not a
mandatory overtime day and that other defendant employees did
not work that Saturday. But sheet metal assembly workers
Gilbert Santiago, Ben Kristek, Caleb Osborn, Laurie Yeager,
and Bob Martin all were scheduled to work and did work on
Saturday, June 6, 2015.
claim arises from three meetings on July 24, 2015, August 3,
2015, and August 5, 2015. Plaintiff claims that on July 24,
he met with Payne and “asked her if I could have my
schedule changed to have Saturdays off and come in and work
Sundays, make up my overtime, make up my time on
Sunday.” Payne told plaintiff to complete a Request for
Time Off form if he needed time off for religious reasons.
Payne also told plaintiff that she could cut his overtime
plaintiff's Saturday hours were overtime hours. Plaintiff
never filled out a Request for Time Off form for a single
Saturday. Plaintiff did, however, complete six Request for
Time Off forms for religious reasons, and defendant approved
all six requests. After requesting Saturdays off on July 24,
2015, plaintiff then worked the next scheduled Saturday shift
on July 26, 2015.
never approached Payne or another supervisor again about
Saturdays. Because plaintiff did not complete Request for
Time Off forms, Payne occasionally scheduled plaintiff for
Saturday shifts after July 24, 2015-specifically, August 29,
October 3, October 17, October 31, and November 7. Plaintiff
never asked Payne to reschedule those five days; instead,
plaintiff was a no-call/no-show on each of those days.
did not discipline plaintiff for his no-call/no-shows after
July 24, 2015. Instead, defendant allowed plaintiff to take
unpaid leave during scheduled Saturdays after July 24, 2015.
Plaintiff admits that defendant “basically just allowed
me to not come in on my scheduled Saturdays.” Plaintiff
alleges that on August 3, 2015, Patrick Earl, sheet-metal
supervisor, told first-shift ...