Introduction

The case of Lola-Lolita Orel v. Infinity Laser Spa Inc., Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., and Sam Rakhminov presents a significant examination of the legal challenges related to sexual harassment, religious discrimination, and wage violations within the workplace. Filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, this case underscores the broad scope of employment discrimination law and the responsibilities of employers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), the New York Labor Law (NYLL), and civil tort claims. This commentary explores the facts of the case, the legal frameworks involved, the process for addressing wage violations, and the implications for employment law.

Factual Background

Lola-Lolita Orel was employed by Infinity Laser Spa Inc. and Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., both owned and operated by Sam Rakhminov. Hired as a Laser Technician, Orel’s responsibilities included performing laser hair removal treatments, providing customer service, and maintaining the overall cleanliness and hygiene of the salon. Orel quickly proved to be a valuable employee, contributing significantly to the business’s success by generating substantial sales and ensuring high customer satisfaction. Despite her qualifications and the value she brought to the business, Orel’s tenure at the spa was overshadowed by a toxic work environment, primarily due to the continuous and severe harassment she faced from her employer, Sam Rakhminov.

From the second week of her employment, Orel became the target of persistent sexual harassment perpetrated by Rakhminov. This harassment included a barrage of inappropriate and degrading comments about her physical appearance. Rakhminov frequently subjected Orel to verbal abuse, referring to her with derogatory terms such as “fat ass” and comparing her to a “plus-size Barbie.” These comments were not isolated incidents but part of a continuous pattern of verbal degradation intended to demean and humiliate her. Rakhminov’s behavior extended beyond verbal harassment; he also questioned Orel’s professional conduct in a sexually suggestive manner. He insinuated that the reason her laser treatments took longer than expected was because she was allegedly providing sexual favors to clients, an accusation that was both baseless and deeply insulting.

The harassment escalated from verbal abuse to physical contact, further intensifying the hostile work environment. Rakhminov made repeated and unwanted physical advances, including playing with Orel’s hair and holding her hand without her consent. These physical acts were not only inappropriate but also a clear violation of Orel’s boundaries, contributing to her growing discomfort and distress in the workplace.

In addition to the ongoing sexual harassment, Orel was also subjected to religious discrimination. After she disclosed her diagnosis of Hashimoto’s disease—a condition affecting her thyroid—to Rakhminov, his response was not one of concern or support but rather ridicule. Rakhminov dismissed her health condition and compounded his harassment by making offensive remarks about her Christian Orthodox faith. He went so far as to mock her religious practices, at one point pretending to tear off her cross necklace, a symbol of her faith, while making derogatory comments. He questioned the legitimacy of her religious beliefs and practices, further alienating Orel in her work environment.

These cumulative actions by Rakhminov created an unbearable work environment that eventually led to Orel’s constructive termination on December 1, 2022.

Legal Framework

A. Sexual Harassment under Title VII

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sex, which includes protection from sexual harassment. Sexual harassment can take the form of quid pro quo harassment, where employment decisions are contingent on submission to sexual advances, or hostile work environment harassment, where the conduct is so severe or pervasive that it creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.

In Orel’s case, the allegations of repeated derogatory comments and unwanted physical contact by Rakhminov likely meet the criteria for a hostile work environment under Title VII. The court will examine the frequency and severity of the harassment, whether it was physically threatening or humiliating, and whether it unreasonably interfered with Orel’s work performance.

B. Religious Discrimination under Title VII, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL

Title VII also protects employees from religious discrimination, requiring employers to accommodate religious practices unless they cause undue hardship. The NYSHRL and NYCHRL expand on these protections, offering broader coverage and lower thresholds for proving discrimination.

Orel’s complaint details how Rakhminov ridiculed her Christian Orthodox beliefs, mocked her religious symbols, and made derogatory comments about her faith. Under federal and state laws, these actions could constitute religious discrimination, contributing to a hostile work environment. The NYCHRL, in particular, offers expansive protections, prohibiting even minor acts of discrimination if they contribute to an unfavorable work environment.

C. Retaliation under Title VII, NYSHRL, NYCHRL, and NYLL

Retaliation claims under Title VII, NYSHRL, NYCHRL, and the New York Labor Law (NYLL) require the plaintiff to demonstrate that they engaged in protected activity, such as opposing discriminatory practices, that they suffered an adverse employment action, and that there was a causal connection between the two.

Orel’s case involves clear instances of retaliation. After resisting Rakhminov’s advances and complaining about her working conditions, her hours were reduced, and she was eventually terminated. These actions would likely be considered adverse employment actions under the law. The court will need to determine if there is a direct link between Orel’s opposition to the harassment and her termination, which would support her retaliation claims.

D. Battery under Tort Law

In addition to her claims under employment discrimination laws, Orel also brought a civil tort claim. Battery is defined as the intentional and unjustified touching of another person without consent, with the intent to cause bodily contact that a reasonable person would find offensive.

Orel’s allegations that Rakhminov repeatedly touched her arms, held her hand and played with her hair without her consent are serious claims that may support her battery claim. If proven, these actions could result in significant damages awarded to Orel for the physical and emotional distress caused by the unwanted contact.

E. Wage and Hour Violations under NYLL

Orel’s case also includes claims under the New York Labor Law (NYLL) for wage and hour violations. The NYLL requires that employees be paid all earned wages, including commissions and tips. Orel alleges that Rakhminov failed to pay her the agreed-upon 10% commission, instead only paying her 8% and that he improperly diverted her tips to other employees.

If proven, these allegations could result in the recovery of unpaid wages, liquidated damages, and attorneys’ fees under the NYLL. The law provides strong protections for employees to ensure they receive fair compensation for their work, and employers who violate these provisions can face substantial financial penalties.

Legal Remedies and Steps to Take If Subjected to Discrimination

Employees who believe they are being harassed, discriminated against, or retaliated against should take several necessary steps to protect their rights:

1. Document the Harassment: Keep detailed records of all incidents, including dates, times, and any witnesses. This documentation is crucial if legal action becomes necessary.
2. Report the Behavior: Notify your employer or HR department of the harassment or discrimination. Follow internal reporting procedures and keep copies of all correspondence.
3. File a Complaint with the EEOC, NYSDHR, or NYCCHR: If your employer does not take appropriate action, consider filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), New York State Division of Human Rights (NYSDHR), or New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR). Under Title VII, this administrative step is necessary to protect the right to sue. Under the NYSHRL or NYCHRL, no administrative steps are necessary to protect the right to sue.
4. Seek Legal Counsel: Consulting with an attorney who handles labor and employment law can help you navigate the legal process and ensure that your rights are protected.

Where and How to File a Complaint About Wage and Hour Violations

If you believe your employer has violated wage and hour laws, such as failing to pay the proper wages, withholding tips, or not providing required overtime pay, it is important to protect your rights. The process for filing a complaint about wage and hour violations can vary depending on your location and the specific laws involved. Below are the general steps to follow:

1. Gather Documentation: Gather all relevant documentation supporting your claim before filing a complaint. This can include pay stubs, time cards, work schedules, employment contracts, and any written agreements regarding wages or commissions. Detailed records of your work hours, wages received, and any discrepancies will support your case.
2. Check Applicable Laws: Wage and hour laws are governed by both federal and state regulations. The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) sets minimum standards for wages, overtime pay, and other employment practices. However, many states, including New York, have their own wage and hour laws that provide additional protections. To understand your rights thoroughly, it’s essential to be aware of federal and state laws.
3. Filing a Complaint with the United States Department of Labor (USDOL):
   • The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) of the United States Department of Labor enforces federal wage and hour laws under the FLSA.
   • To file a complaint with the USDOL, you can visit the WHD’s website and complete the online complaint form. You may also file a complaint at a local WHD office or call the WHD’s toll-free number.
   • You must provide your personal information, details about your employer, and specific information about the wage and hour violations you report.
4. Filing a Complaint with the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL):
   • The NYSDOL is responsible for enforcing New York state wage and hour laws. If you believe your employer has violated New York’s labor laws, you can file a complaint with the NYSDOL.
   • The NYSDOL provides an online wage complaint form you can complete and submit electronically. Alternatively, you can download the form and mail it to the NYSDOL or file your complaint in person at a local NYSDOL office.
   • The complaint form will ask for information about your employer, work history, and the nature of the wage violations.
5. Consulting with an Attorney:
   • If you are unsure about the process or need assistance with your complaint, consulting with an attorney who handles labor and employment law is advisable. An attorney can help you navigate the legal process, ensure your complaint is filed correctly, and represent you in negotiations or litigation if necessary.
6. What to Expect After Filing:
   • After you file a complaint, the relevant agency (USDOL or NYSDOL) will investigate your claim. This may involve contacting your employer, reviewing your work records, and gathering additional information.
   • If the investigation finds that your employer violated wage and hour laws, the agency may order the employer to pay back wages, damages, and other penalties. You may also be entitled to recover attorney’s fees if you had legal representation.
7. Additional Considerations:
   • It is illegal for an employer to retaliate against you for filing a wage and hour complaint. If you experience retaliation, such as termination, demotion, or harassment, you should immediately report this to the agency handling your complaint or seek legal counsel.
   • Remember that there are time limits (statutes of limitations) for filing wage and hour complaints. Under federal law, you generally have two years from the date of the violation to file a complaint, but this period may be extended in cases of willful violations. State laws may have different deadlines, so it is important to act promptly.

By following these steps, employees can take action to protect their rights and seek compensation for any wage and hour violations they have experienced. Filing a complaint is an important step in holding employers accountable for complying with labor laws and ensuring fair treatment in the workplace.

Impact of the Muldrow Case on Employment Discrimination Litigation

The Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis has significantly impacted employment discrimination litigation, particularly in claims involving hostile work environments and retaliation. The Muldrow decision clarified that the burden of proof shifts slightly in cases where an employee alleges discriminatory conduct but does not suffer a tangible employment action—such as termination, demotion, or a pay cut. This ruling has crucial implications for how courts evaluate claims of harassment that may not result in immediate economic harm but create a hostile work environment.

In Muldrow, the Court held that Title VII does not require plaintiffs to demonstrate a “significant” or “materially adverse” impact to establish a discrimination claim. Instead, the Court clarified that any discriminatory action affecting the “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” is sufficient to bring a Title VII claim. This ruling rejects the heightened harm standard previously applied by some lower courts and broadens the scope of actionable claims under Title VII.

Application to Orel v. Infinity Laser Spa Inc., Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., and Sam Rakhminov

This decision is particularly relevant to the case of Lola-Lolita Orel v. Infinity Laser Spa Inc., Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., and Sam Rakhminov. Orel’s claims involve persistent sexual harassment, religious discrimination, and retaliation that created a deeply hostile work environment. While Orel ultimately faced tangible adverse actions—such as a reduction in hours and eventual termination—the Muldrow ruling reinforces that even before these tangible actions occurred, the discriminatory conduct she endured would have been sufficient to bring a Title VII claim.

The Muldrow decision also emphasizes that Title VII claims can be based on any discriminatory conduct that affects the “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment,” which directly applies to Orel’s situation. The repeated derogatory comments, unwelcome physical contact, and religious discrimination Orel experienced significantly altered the conditions of her employment, contributing to an intolerable and hostile environment.

Moreover, the Muldrow ruling underscores the importance of state and local laws in providing broader protections than those available under federal law. The New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) offer more expansive definitions of harassment and retaliation, making it easier for plaintiffs like Orel to bring successful claims. Under NYSHRL and NYCHRL, the threshold for proving harassment is lower, and the laws do not require the harassment to be “severe or pervasive” to be actionable. This means that Orel’s experience of ongoing harassment and discrimination, even if it had not resulted in her termination, would still constitute a violation under New York law.

The Muldrow decision is likely to profoundly influence the Orel case. The ruling broadens the scope of what can be considered actionable under Title VII and reinforces the protections offered by state and local laws like NYSHRL and NYCHRL. This expanded interpretation is expected to support Orel’s claims of a hostile work environment and retaliation, ensuring that her experiences are recognized as violations of her legal rights under federal and New York law.

Broader Implications for Employment Discrimination Cases

The outcome of Orel v. Infinity Laser Spa Inc., Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., and Sam Rakhminov may set important precedents for future employment discrimination cases. A ruling in favor of Orel could reinforce the need for employers to take immediate and effective action to address complaints of harassment and discrimination. It may also underscore the broad protections provided by state and city laws in New York, which could influence how other jurisdictions approach similar cases.

For employees, this case highlights the importance of understanding their rights and taking proactive steps to protect themselves from harassment, retaliation, and wage violations. It serves as a reminder that legal remedies are available and that employees should not hesitate to seek legal counsel if they believe their rights have been violated.

The implications for employers are equally significant. This case underscores the need for comprehensive training programs, clear anti-harassment policies, and a commitment to fostering a workplace culture where discrimination is not tolerated. Employers must be vigilant to prevent harassment and wage violations and ensure that all complaints are addressed promptly and effectively.

Conclusion

The lawsuit filed by Lola-Lolita Orel against Infinity Laser Spa Inc., Spektrum Laser Spa Inc., and Sam Rakhminov underscores the severe impact that sexual harassment, religious discrimination, and wage violations can have on an employee’s life and career. As this case progresses, it will provide critical insights into how courts interpret and apply employment discrimination and labor laws, particularly about creating a hostile work environment, retaliation, and wage violations.

If you believe you have been subjected to discrimination, harassment, or wage violations in the workplace, it is crucial to take immediate action. Document the incidents, report the conduct to your employer, and consider filing a charge with the EEOC, New York State Division of Human Rights, New York City Commission on Human Rights, or the Department of Labor to protect your rights. For more detailed information and legal support, visit our blog at The Sanders Firm, P.C., where you can explore our resources on workplace discrimination and harassment. Stay informed by subscribing to our newsletter, following us on LinkedIn, joining our Facebook Fan page, or watching our video discussions on our YouTube channel.

Read the federal complaint.