Ex-Employee Files Harassment Suit Against Pittsfield Co-Op, Marchetti

Staff ReportsiBerkshires
Print Story | Email Story
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — Mayoral candidate and City Council President Peter Marchetti is included in a federal court filing against Pittsfield Cooperative Bank by a former employee alleging a hostile work environment and sex discrimination that led to her termination.
 
Richmond resident Victoria May filed the complaint on Sept. 11 in U.S. District Court in Springfield against Pittsfield Cooperative Bank, its President Jay Anderson, Senior Vice President of Retail Banking Operations Peter Marchetti and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Harry Moore. The lawsuit was first reported by blogger Dan Valenti on PlanetValenti.com. 
 
Marchetti is included in the counts for sex discrimination, creating a hostile work environment, aiding and abetting discriminatory acts, unlawful interference with plaintiff's rights, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
 
May, the former vice president of marketing, was hired in 2016 and said she was terminated in February 2023 while on leave after what she describes as being set up to fail, emotionally abused and retaliated against. The filing claims that women who work for the defendants are "serially not promoted in management positions" and that May had been the only woman vice president after a history of mainly white men.
 
Pittsfield Cooperative Bank in a statement on Monday confirmed May had been an employee and had filed an internal harassment complaint, but pushed back on the lengthy allegations in the suit stating, "they have evolved over time to become more and more salacious." It declined to comment on the circumstances of May's separation from the institution in February.
 
Marchetti, who has been with the company for decades, is accused of being "allowed to denigrate, harass, and demean (May) both in meetings with others and alone." May alleges that the treatment she received from Marchetti and the other defendants led to the loss of her job.
 
According to the complaint, May sent Anderson a message stating she felt that Marchetti was trying to get her fired in July 2021. In October 2022, she was asked to take over the bank website from the female e-business manager who had left.
 
"[May] had little experience or expertise to do so, which Defendants knew, but they gave her the role anyway. She was not provided training, support or assistance for this role, despite requesting it," the lawsuit reads. "She believed she was being set up to fail. She took it upon herself to hire a consultant to assist with this work."
 
During a meeting on Oct. 22, 2022, Marchetti is accused of "flying off the handle" and being "irrationally upset" that May received the role over him.  
 
"He began yelling, red-faced and sweating, pointing in Plaintiff's face, calling her a bitch and other derogatory names, told her to shut up, and told her she did not know how to do things," the filing states. "Anderson was present for this entire 30-40 minute attack on (May) and did nothing to intervene except to tell Defendant Marchetti, ‘get hold of yourself.' (May) left the bank crying in the parking lot."
 
To her knowledge, Anderson did nothing to reprimand Marchetti.
 
May reports that through fall 2022 and January 2023, Marchetti would "snidely refer to training and informational files that he had on E-Business protocols and imply what a shame it was that he could not locate them." She claims that no one assisted her and she did her best to perform the job but Marchetti would "go out of his way to find it and announce it to other co-workers" if a mistake was made.
 
The bank acknowledged that May had filed a claim of sexual harassment in January against one co-worker.
 
"The bank responded swiftly and decidedly by hiring an outside investigator to conduct a prompt and thorough investigation into her complaint. The outside investigator the Bank engaged to review Ms. May's concerns conducted a thorough investigation and concluded that Ms. May's complaints were unsubstantiated. Ms. May's complaint to the Bank in January did not contain the same allegations she now asserts in the complaint filed in the United States District Court; rather, it seems her allegations have evolved over time to become more and more salacious."
 
"The Bank is committed to a workplace that is safe, inclusive, and free of conduct that violates the Bank's policies, including its anti-harassment and discrimination policy. The Bank has a reasonable policy concerning reporting complaints of harassment and takes prompt action when such complaints are reported. The Bank disputes many of the allegations in Ms. May's complaint and intends to vigorously defend itself and its employees and officers against these allegations. The Bank looks forward to its opportunity to address Ms. May's accusations in the appropriate forum."
 
May's lawsuit states that after a complaint to human resources, Marchetti admitted to May that he had been in trouble with the bank in the past for calling at least one other female employee a "bitch."
 
Following her complaints, she said Moore and Anderson began retaliating against her and made her job more difficult and demeaning in an effort to force her to leave.
 
She said Moore allowed Marchetti to constantly question her about the smallest task that he became aware that she may not have done. In October 2022, May claimed that Marchetti and one of his employees responded with six or seven revisions to a postcard created with an outside vendor and slowed its completion.
 
"Once (May) completed her work, both Defendant Marchetti and Mr. Schumann responded negatively and questioned if it would be effective. Plaintiff nonetheless launched the project and it was successful," the filing reads.
 
"After the project was completed, Plaintiff was drafting an email on or about October 20, 2022 to Moore and Anderson regarding the harassment and demeaning behavior she was experiencing, as she was at her breaking point. While drafting it, Anderson stopped by and saw that she was upset. He read over the email and told Plaintiff to send it. She did."
 
A couple of days later Moore reportedly asked for a meeting that May could not make due to a dentist appointment and asked to reschedule. May was reportedly given a written warning for trying to move the meeting and said Anderson did not clarify that he encouraged her to send the email.
 
She believed to have been set up and was then placed on a 30-day performance improvement plan.
 
May was reportedly threatened with termination in late 2022 or early 2023 by Moore and she took a leave in mid-January 2023 after Moore yelled at her in front of other staff. This combined with the "stress caused by the harassing behavior of defendants, their retaliatory actions against her, and the emotional distress it caused her" prompted the leave.
 
May was terminated on Feb. 1, according to her suit.
 
The filing states that male employees such as Marchetti and Vice President of Operations Dana Robb routinely received annual raises of 4 to 5 percent, while the women, officers or otherwise, usually received a 2 percent raise.  
 
May started at a salary of approximately $80,000 and at the time of her termination made around $92,000 annually. She said that she never received more than a 2.5 percent raise.
 
She also alleged that the work environment was often sexually inappropriate.
 
iBerkshires has reached out to Marchetti for a statement.

Tags: lawsuit,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Is the Select Board Listening to Dalton Voters?

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

A reasonable expectation by the people of a community is that their Select Board rises above personal preference and represents the collective interests of the community. On Tuesday night [Nov. 12], what occurred is reason for concern that might not be true in Dalton.

This all began when a Select Board member submitted his resignation effective Oct. 1 to the Town Clerk. Wishing to fill the vacated Select Board seat, in good faith I followed the state law, prepared a petition, and collected the required 200-plus signatures of which the Town Clerk certified 223. The Town Manager, who already had a copy of the Select Board member's resignation, was notified of the certified petitions the following day. All required steps had been completed.

Or had they? At the Oct. 9 Select Board meeting when Board members discussed the submitted petition, there was no mention about how they were informed of the petition or that they had not seen the resignation letter. Then a month later at the Nov. 12 Select Board meeting we learn that providing the resignation letter and certified petitions to the Town Manager was insufficient. However, by informing the Town Manager back in October the Select Board had been informed. Thus, the contentions raised at the Nov. 12 meeting by John Boyle seem like a thinly veiled attempt to delay a decision until the end of January deadline to have a special election has passed.

If this is happening with the Special Election, can we realistically hope that the present Board will listen to the call by residents to halt the rapid increases in spending and our taxes that have been occurring the last few years and pass a level-funded budget for next year, or to not harness the taxpayers in town with the majority of the cost for a new police station? I am sure these issues are of concern to many in town. However, to make a change many people need to speak up.

Please reach out to a Select Board member and let them know you are concerned and want the Special Election issue addressed and finalized at their Nov. 25 meeting.

Robert E.W. Collins
Dalton, Mass.

 

 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories