Older Defendant to Younger Plaintiff: “You’re No Spring Chicken!”

Santa Barbara, CAUnder California labor law, akin to generally-recognized statutes in force elsewhere, it remains unlawful to terminate an individual’s employment without just cause. In this California labor lawsuit, total damages exceeding a half million dollars were awarded to the plaintiff, resolving a complaint and accompanying circumstances that bordered on the bizarre.

According to published reports and the facts of the case, plaintiff Charles Saccio was employed as the food and beverage director at Eladio’s Restaurant and Harbor View Inn, a facility located in the Santa Barbara area of California. Plaintiff Saccio began employment at the facility on January 13, 2013 reporting to Mark Romasanta, the general manager of the facility and the son of the defendant and facility owner.

On the one-year anniversary of Saccio’s hiring, following a favorable performance review, Saccio was given a bonus and an $8,000 raise in salary, bringing Saccio to $60,000 in wages per year.

Five months later, according to testimony given by Mark Romasanta at the California labor code trial, Saccio’s performance was still viewed as favorable as of June 9, 2014 – the point at which Mark Romasanta took leave for a brief vacation.

Two days later, on June 11 2014, the general manager’s father and owner of the facility is alleged to have called Saccio into a meeting, inquiring about Saccio’s age. The plaintiff informed the defendant that he was 64 years of age. At this juncture defendant Antonio Romasanta, 84 – who was 20 years older than Saccio – is alleged to have said to the plaintiff, “you’re no spring chicken!” and proceeded to inform Saccio that a woman, age 30, had been hired as Saccio’s assistant. The elder Romasanta directed the plaintiff to train the new hire.

The following day, Saccio reported the incident to the human resources director of the facility, stating that he feared for his job due to his age. According to the facts of the case, there was no investigation of Saccio’s complaint, allegedly in violation of the company’s stated HR policies. A directive from the general manager, Mark Romasanta, is alleged to have stated that his father Antonio remained focused on the business issues of the enterprise, “and I have no control of [Antonio Romasanta’s] decisions,” Mark Romasanta declared.

Saccio was, indeed, terminated from his job two weeks later, on June 25 2014, ostensibly for performance deficiencies that were not specified, or documented. Stated polices requiring progressive discipline when performance issues come to the fore, were allegedly not implemented.

A letter of termination placed in Saccio’s personnel file stated, in part, that the plaintiff’s termination was “based on poor performance…failure to perform the duties of the position and the standard required…work performance and quality of work has not met our expectations,” without further elaboration.

It is further alleged, in the termination meeting attended by the plaintiff, the defendant and Carla Silva, the director for human recourses at the facility, that Antonio Romasanta repeated his assertion that “you’re no spring chicken!” to the plaintiff, who at 64 was 20 years younger than the defendant.

According to the facts of the case, Saccio was replaced by the younger female trainee. Carla Silva, the director responsible for human resources at the time, resigned from her position. Her replacement, according to the facts of the case, was compelled to investigate a complaint against the plaintiff’s successor three months after the woman’s promotion to the post of food and beverage director, after a subordinate accused the woman of creating a hostile work environment.

Following an investigation and the taking of statements from all parties, the food and beverage director was given a written warning. In spite of this, the defendant rewarded the food and beverage director with a raise in salary to $60,000.

Saccio sued for alleged employment and age discrimination, defamation and also alleged a hostile work environment. Upon the conclusion of his California labor employment lawsuit, the plaintiff was awarded $38,800 in special damages for past lost earnings, $31,777 for future economic loss, $75,000 for past non-economic loss, and $400,000 in punitive damages for a total award of $545,777.

It is not known if the defendant intends to appeal the verdict, which was handed down November 22. The lawsuit was originally filed April 27 of last year.

The case is Charles Saccio v. Antonio R. Romasanta, DBA Eladio’s Restaurant, Case No. 15-cv-00672, Santa Barbara Superior Court.