A judge dismissed a lawsuit brought against the city by a Los Angeles police detective who alleged he was subjected to retaliation by two supervisors, including one who called him a “typical macho Hispanic male.”
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jon R. Takasugi on Friday granted a motion by the City Attorney’s Office to dismiss Detective Alfonso Munoz’s case, finding that the plaintiff failed to present evidence “to support an inference that he suffered an adverse employment action.”
Munoz was assigned to Commercial Crimes Division at the Valley Financial Section and is an expert in surveillance, according to his suit filed in October 2018.
Detective Vivian Flores served in charge of VFS, had a history of difficult relationships with her coworkers and asked Munoz to move his desk close to hers, but he said he preferred not to, the suit states.
Munoz’s response agitated Flores, who often argued with him in front of other unit members, once calling him a “typical Macho Hispanic male,” according to the suit.
Munoz filed a complaint for race and gender discrimination and harassment against Flores with a captain who responded by transferring the plaintiff to an offsite facility and told him to stay away from VFS meetings, the suit states.
“This … made plaintiff appear to be the guilty party” while isolating him and diminishing his duties, the suit alleged.
The captain who made the decision has a history of retaliation against employees who file complaints, whether against him or those subordinates he favors, the suit stated.
After Munoz accepted an assignment at the due diligence unit, the captain made “disparaging and detrimental comments” to a lieutenant with the unit and ordered that the plaintiff be placed under “heightened scrutiny,” the suit stated.
But in his ruling, the judge noted that the City Attorney’s Office presented evidence that the captain offered Munoz at least five opportunities to separate him Flores while Internal Affairs investigated his personnel complaint.
One of the job options was to supervise an elite auto-theft unit and another was for a training coordinator position, but Munoz declined both offers, the judge noted.
Munoz did not dispute that he maintained his same rank, pay, benefits and hours, and admitted he did not attempt to be promoted, Takasugi further noted.
“Moreover, even assuming plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action, (the city’s) evidence supports a reasonable inference that plaintiff was transferred as part of a personnel decision based on the operational needs of the division to ensure harmony and efficiency, rather than out of personal animus …,” the judge wrote.