“Long-Covid” Discrimination Lawsuit Filed Against Lifespan by Former Employee in Federal Court

“Long-Covid” Discrimination Lawsuit Filed Against Lifespan by Former Employee in Federal Court

A former employee of Lifespan has filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging disability discrimination, after she said she was fired after suffering from long-COVID. 

Dawn Desilets, who served in administrative roles with Lifespan since 2016, said she was told via Zoom in December 2021 that she was being fired for violating Lifespan’s COVID policies — and Desilets maintains she did not. 

Moreover, Desilets says she Lifespan retaliated against her for exercising her rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

Desilets' attorney Paige Munro-Delotto, whose practices employment discrimination law, said this was the first time she took a case for the disability of long-haul COVID. 

"I had to check first that the proper authorities regarded it as a disability and I cited to that authority in the complaint," said Munro-Delotto. 

 

About Case 

On January 5, 2023, Desilets filed the federal lawsuit — demanding a trial by jury — alleging that she was unjustly fired in 2021. 

Desilets had filed charges of discrimination with the Rhode Island Commission of Human Rights (RICHR) in May of 2021, and in October 2021, RICHR issued a notice of a right to sue, enabling the civil action to be filed. 

According to the lawsuit, Desilets was first hired by Lifespan in 2016 as a Supervisor of Registration and later moved to Manager of EG Psychiatry Department, before being promoted in 2019 to Practice Manager in Lifespan’s Recovery Center. 

Desilets says in the lawsuit “she earned yearly pay increases and bonuses, the most recent being a pay increase and bonus after her yearly review in or around the summer of 2021” and that her performance reviews were “Exceptional and/or Successful Performance; she also had no discipline on her record.”

After working from home during the pandemic, and then returning to work in June of 2021, Desilets said she contracted COVID in August 2021 and maintains she had followed all proper Lifespan procedure regarding leaving work when she had felt ill and getting tested. 

 

Desilets said she then applied for FMLA and was approved for it by September 2021, at which time she was suffering from “long haul” COVID symptoms. 

While she was on leave under FMLA, Desilets said administrative changes were made and her former boss retired; she said her new supervisor performed a “surprise visit” to her home in October of 2021. 

In November 2021, Desilets — who said she informed her employer and colleagues of her long-haul COVID — was medically cleared to return to work. 

“Leadership of Lifespan unquestionably knew that Plaintiff suffered from ‘Long-Haul’ COVID and knew she was not actively infected with COVID at that time; they also knew or should have known that Plaintiff did not need to be tested and would not be susceptible to COVID, according to the Lifespan RN, until approximately February 2022,” according to the lawsuit.

Desilets said upon returning to work she was treated "differently" because of her long-haul COVID which included being subject to micromanagement that “similarly situated” colleges were not subject to. 

On December 2, 2021, Desilets said her husband called to tell her he had tested positive for COVID, at which time she contacted Lifespan’s employee health department, who confirmed Lifespan did not require that she need to be tested because of her immunity following her recent infection. 

She said she took a precautionary test that showed she was negative. 

Desilets said on December 6, 2021, she was asked to join a Zoom meeting with her supervisor and HR, at which time she was told she was fired for violating Lifespan’s sick policy because she “came into work sick twice.” 

 

“In short, at no time did plaintiff go to work wick in violation of policy,” states the lawsuit. 

When Desilets asked repeatedly for the official explanation of her termination, she found Lifespan had changed their rationale to say it was due to “poor work performance issues.”

Desilets in the lawsuit argued she had “zero write ups, all good performance reviews, and received bonuses and raises in proximate time to her sudden termination in December of 2021.”

The lawsuit is asking that the court make Desilets whole by “awarding appropriate back pay with interest, front pay, compensation for all other lost income and benefits, earning capacity, and all other relevant entitlements and emoluments.”

LIfespan refused to respond to request for comment.