Former G4S security guards Miguel B. Lagare and Bonifacio V. Sagana filed their discrimination lawsuit against G4S last year. Attorney Steven Woodruff represents them.
Attorney Maya B. Kara represents G4S, which court documents described as an affiliate of a leading international security company with more than 160 employees locally, and over half a million workers worldwide.
“Based on the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered: Defendant’s time to respond to plaintiffs’ complaint is extended to the close of business, Wednesday, June 1, 2011,” Tydingco-Gatewood wrote in her order.
The plaintiffs who are both from the Philippines claimed G4S discriminated them when their contracts were abruptly terminated.
The two sought first the assistance of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, before filing their case in federal court.
Based on court documents, Lagare began employment with G4S on Feb. 28, 2001. His ties with the company ended on April 13, 2010 due to non-renewal of contract.
“When defendant informed plaintiff Lagare that his contract was not being renewed, defendant stated this was because they were giving local preference to U.S. citizens on job employment. Plaintiff Lagare, thus, was terminated because he is an alien, in order for defendant to hire a non-alien,” Woodruff stated in the complaint.
Sagana, on the other hand, worked from May 2003 to 2006 for G4S. Like Lagare, his contract was not renewed because other nationals were favored.
“Throughout his employment, plaintiff Sagana observed that defendant gave Bangladeshi employees more desirable work assignments and more opportunities to work overtime than Filipino employees. Defendant’s unlawful and discriminatory practices because of national origin as alleged deprived plaintiffs of equal employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affected their status as employees,” Woodruff said.
The plaintiffs are asking for punitive damages and loss of earnings, attorney’s fees and costs, among other relief that the court deems just and proper.
