A lawsuit has been filed against Apple in Chicago by a former Apple Store manager by the name of James Bruno. The case falls under the "Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment Jurisdiction." The case involves a number of charges including unlawful sexual discrimination and retaliatory discharge. The latter charge involves the Plaintiff's account of how Apple reports the dollar value of all sales transactions completed at each store, without adjusting the numbers to account for customer returns. Mr. Bruno believed this practice constituted fraud and a violation of The Sarbanes Oxley Act. He reported this to superiors above his local manager which reportedly started a political campaign against him.

Introduction

Mr. Bruno worked as a manager at Apple's Deer Park, Illinois, Northbrook, Illinois, and Chicago, Illinois retail stores from July of 2011 to May of 2014. During his employment with Apple, Mr. Bruno was subjected to pervasive and denigrating remarks by his colleagues and superiors pertaining to his sexual orientation.

Additionally, Mr. Bruno, who has been diagnosed with clinical depression, requested but was not given a reasonable accommodation.

Finally, when Mr. Bruno raised concerns that his colleagues at Apple were participating in fraudulent activity, Apple retaliated against him for raising these concerns and terminated his employment.

The Lawsuit's Five Counts against Apple

COUNT I: Failure to Accommodate (Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq).

COUNT II: Disability Discrimination (Violation of Americans with Disabilities Act,

42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq)

COUNT III: Unlawful Sexual Harassment (Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.)

COUNT IV: Unlawful Discrimination on Account of Mr. Bruno's Sexual Orientation (Violation of Illinois Human Rights Act)

COUNT V: Retaliatory Discharge

The court document reveals that the Plaintiff James Bruno respectfully requests the entry of judgment in his favor and against Defendant as follows:

A) An award of damages for back pay, front pay, and other equitable relief;

B) An award of compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial;

C) Punitive damages;

D) An award to Plaintiff for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs;

E) Award prejudgment interest; and

F) All other relief this Court deems just.

About the Retaliatory Discharge Claims

Although the court document details Mr. Bruno's account of his depression/disability and the sexual orientation discrimination he felt while being employed at Apple retail stores, we'll only present one of the aspects of this case in our report relating to the retaliatory discharge. While this position is presented by Mr. Bruno's attorney in the formal complaint before the court, it should be understood that it remains an allegation until proven.

The alleged events are presented in the court document as follows:

The Court Document's Segment Title: Mr. Bruno was retaliated against for Voicing Concerns about Illegal Activities and Other Problems at the Northbrook Apple Store.

"During his conversation with Ms. [X] [X = Apple Store Leader at the Northbrook Store, name removed] on July 9, 2013, Mr. Bruno told Ms. [X] about several problems at the Northbrook Store that he intended to report to Apple Human Resources through Ms. [Y] [Y, name removed].

Among the issues that Mr. Bruno raised at that time included his concern that many of his co-workers were defrauding Apple by editing time cards in order to get paid for hours they did not work, and that these individuals had actually received assistance in their fraudulent scheme from store management.

In this same conversation, Mr. Bruno also reported a potentially massive fraud being perpetrated by Apple, a publicly traded company, regarding the manner in which Apple stores record sales. Specifically, Apple stores report as revenue the dollar value of all sales transactions completed at each store, without adjusting the numbers to account for customer returns, a practice Mr. Bruno has personally witnessed in both stores he has managed as well as several additional stores where he has filled in temporarily. What this means is that Apple has grossly overinflated the revenue per square foot and other sales data associated with its retail stores when reporting the company's financial results to shareholders and prospective shareholders. Mr. Bruno advised Ms.[X] that he believed this practice constituted fraud and a violation of The Sarbanes Oxley Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1514A.

After Mr. Bruno expressed his concerns to Ms.[X], she ordered him to stay quiet and give her a chance to "fix it." Just a few days later, on July 13, 2013, Mr. Bruno learned what Ms. [X] meant when she said she would "fix it," when Ms. [X] informed Mr. Bruno that she had reported (falsely) to Ms. [Z] [Z = supervisor, name removed] and Ms. [Y] that Mr. Bruno had quit his job and provided two weeks' notice. When Mr. Bruno made it clear that he had no intention of resigning, Ms. [X] threatened to fire him.

Just as Ms. [Z] had done, Ms.[X] also used Mr. Bruno's disability against him and claimed that even if Mr. Bruno tried to go to Ms. [Z] with the truth, Ms. [Z] Coleman would not believe him because of his "mental instabilities." Ms. [X] then admitted that she had another Apple store manager spend the entire previous day monitoring him to try and catch him making a mistake. When Mr. Bruno explicitly asked if he was going to be fired because of his disability, Ms. [X] simply stated that Mr. Bruno was going to be fired if he did not leave in two weeks.

On July 16, 2013, Mr. Bruno formally complained to Apple Human Resources via Ms. [Y] regarding the various legal and ethical violations he had previously reported to Ms. [X], including the fraudulent reporting of hours by Apple employees and the fraudulent recording of Apple store sales. Rather than take any action to address the serious concerns reported by Mr. Bruno, Ms. [Y] told Mr. Bruno to stay quiet while she conducted an "investigation."

In the meantime, Mr. Bruno's supervisors and fellow managers ostracized him, publicly humiliated him, illegally disclosed details about his mental health, and wasted countless hours monitoring him in a failed effort to catch him making errors.

For example, Ms. [X] began encouraging Mr. Bruno's co-workers to report any criticisms they had about him. Despite the fact that Mr. Bruno's peers were openly encouraged by their superiors to submit complaints regarding Mr. Bruno, few complaints were actually made. Additionally, and despite the serious nature of Mr. Bruno's concerns, Ms. [Z] told Mr. Bruno he was "wasting company time" by talking to Human Resources.

The case which falls under the "Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment Jurisdiction" presented in today's report was filed in the Northern District of Illinois, Chicago Office. The Presiding Judge in this case is noted as being the Honorable Edmond E. Chang.

Update June 20th 8:30PM MST: The names of the Apple employees listed in the court document have been removed out of professional courtesy. The positions of the individuals whose names have been removed are described initially for context.

Patently Apple presents only a brief summary of certain legal cases/ lawsuits which are part of the public record for journalistic news purposes. Readers are cautioned that Patently Apple does not offer a legal opinion on the merit of the case. A lawyer should be consulted for any further details or analysis. About Comments: Patently Apple reserves the right to post, dismiss or edit comments.





