A woman who sued a Valley Village senior assisted living facility for $20 million, alleging she was wrongfully fired in 2023 because she declined to attend a company Christmas party due to her being a Jehovah’s Witness, will have to arbitrate her claims, a judge has ruled.
Plaintiff Alicxa Manchan’s Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit against Glen Park Valley Village also alleges religious discrimination, retaliation, failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation and failure to accommodate religious belief and/or observance.
On Friday, Judge Rolf M. Treu said Manchan, 58, was bound by an “existing and enforceable agreement” to arbitrate any work-related disputes.
Manchan did not deny the agreement existed, but contended that it was “unconscionable” because it was presented to her on a “take it or leave it basis” as a condition of employment and that she was not given a chance to negotiate or opt out.
But Treu said Manchan did not ask any questions or indicate that she sought further explanation of the agreement, nor has she established any “surprise or sharp practices” that establish a high degree of unfairness.
According to the suit, Manchan was hired in November 2023 as a retirement counselor and her duties included traveling to various skilled nursing facilities and hospitals to generate leads, meeting with potential residents and obtaining referral sources.
The next month, the human resources department sent emails to all employees about the upcoming company Christmas party and the assistant executive director inquired of the plaintiff whether she would attend, according to the suit, which further states that Manchan declined on religious grounds.
“Through this conversation, plaintiff at once placed defendant on notice of her religious beliefs while at the same time making a request for reasonable accommodations in the form of being excused from participating in the Christmas party,” the suit states.
However, instead of accommodating Manchan, the assistant executive director told the plaintiff that it was “going to look bad” if she did not attend the festivities and hinted that the plaintiff could be fired if she decided not to go, the suit states.
“Shocked and offended by the thinly veiled threat, plaintiff felt as though she was being forced to choose between her religious beliefs and her employment with defendant,” the suit states.
The next day, the facility’s executive director accepted Manchan’s proposed compromise to perform in-person marketing duties in lieu of going to the party, the suit states. Nonetheless, while the party was under way an employee called Manchan to inquire of her whereabouts and the plaintiff reiterated her religious beliefs while explaining she was out marketing, the suit states.
However, the caller told Manchan that she should be at the party because the facility’s owner was there, the suit states.
“Once again, plaintiff was greatly disappointed in the intolerance of her religious beliefs,” the suit states.
Four days later, Manchan was asked by management to stay behind after a staff meeting about the importance of supporting company events and the plaintiff was told, “It’s been decided this is your last day,” the suit filed last June 11 states.
Management told Manchan she was being terminated for a poor job performance even though that was never an issue before, according to the suit, which further states that the plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, financial losses and reputational damage.
The judge put the case on hold pending the outcome of the arbitration and scheduled a status conference for March 2, 2027.