Quantcast

Plaintiff Alleges Major Utility Company Engaged in Age Discrimination

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Tuesday, April 15, 2025

Plaintiff Alleges Major Utility Company Engaged in Age Discrimination

State Court
Webp s3se8xmjipo5y0vlczn9011qv2bn

Superior Court of California - County of San Francisco | Official website

In a gripping legal battle, a seasoned employee is taking on a major corporation over allegations of age discrimination and wrongful termination. Reza Dowlatshahi filed a complaint against Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, on April 1, 2025. The lawsuit accuses PG&E of pushing out Dowlatshahi, an experienced 62-year-old employee, in favor of younger workers.

Dowlatshahi's complaint outlines a series of troubling events that began when he started reporting to Director Samantha Kuks in November 2023. Despite decades of commendable service at PG&E, Dowlatshahi alleges that Kuks favored younger employees and dismissed concerns from older team members. He claims that after voicing his concerns about unfair treatment and workplace conditions, he became the target of retaliation. "The retaliation was swift and calculated," the complaint states, detailing how Kuks allegedly placed him on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) as a pretext for termination.

The lawsuit further accuses PG&E and Kuks of orchestrating a discriminatory scheme to replace Dowlatshahi with someone younger. The case highlights how performance reviews were allegedly weaponized to justify his dismissal under false pretenses. According to the complaint, despite receiving positive verbal feedback during meetings with Kuks, written evaluations were unexpectedly negative—a move Dowlatshahi believes was designed to facilitate his termination.

Dowlatshahi's legal action includes several causes: wrongful termination in violation of public policy, age discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), work environment harassment, failure to prevent harassment and retaliation, and violations under Labor Code § 1102.5 for retaliation. He seeks general damages exceeding the court's jurisdictional limits, punitive damages to deter similar misconduct by others, prejudgment interest, costs including attorney fees, and any other relief deemed just by the court.

Representing Dowlatshahi are attorneys Camron Dowlatshahi and Mir Raza from Mills Sadat Dowlat LLP. The case is being heard by Judge Sahar Enayati under Case No. CGC-25-623882.

More News