NEW ORLEANS – A longtime Cardinal Health employee claims she was discriminated against due to her race, sex, and age, and then wrongfully terminated while she was on protected leave.
Plaintiff Dr. Zeta L. Hayes-Gabriel sued Cardinal Health in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
In her nine-page complaint, Hayes-Gabriel claims Cardinal, in “creating, maintaining and/or allowing a hostile work environment” and discriminating and retaliating against her, violated the federal Family and Medical Leave Act and the Civil Rights Act.
“Defendant’s deviation from its standard practices and procedures, to discipline an employee where none was warranted, was based on the racial differences of the employee,” the lawsuit states.
Hayes-Gabriel, who is Black, worked as a nuclear pharmacist at Cardinal, which is a supervisory position, she notes in her suit.
Prior to December 2024, she claims she had an “unblemished” performance record with Cardinal. She worked 35 years for the company, a major distributor of pharmaceuticals and specialty products.
“Then, out of the blue, she was issued a final written warning based upon a claim that she had harassed a female Caucasian employee – a claim which was unwitnessed, undocumented, and untrue,” her complaint states.
More than six months later, in July 2025 – absent any warning, she points out – she was terminated.
Cardinal claims Hayes-Gabriel allegedly harassed a white female employee who was on FMLA leave, the lawsuit states.
“First, the employee was not yet on FMLA leave. Second, she was being counseled by Plaintiff, which, as a supervisor, was one of Plaintiff’s assigned tasks,” the suit states.
Hayes-Gabriel claims – pursuant to company policy – she was to be provided an opportunity to respond to the allegation prior to becoming final. However, that never happened, she alleges.
“It was submitted without Plaintiff’s response, creating the impression that it had been presented to her for her signature and she had refused to sign it,” the suit states.
From the initial write-up, on Dec. 12, 2024, to July 14, 2025, Hayes-Gabriel claims there were no issues “adversely impacting her job performance.”
Then, on July 14, 2025, Hayes-Gabriel was part of a conference call with Shane Tichinel, her direct supervisor, and Alonzo Keys, another employee.
The purpose of the call was to determine how Keys had obtained access to Hayes-Gabriel’s login credentials “for payroll purposes only.”
“Plaintiff and Mr. Keys explained how he obtained access to the login credentials and what they were used for,” the complaint states. “They were assured by Mr. Tichinel that since they were both very transparent about the matter, there would be no repercussions.”
However, it was later determined that Keys had obtained access to login credentials of several other employees, the suit notes.
As a result, on July 25, 2024, Tichinel called Hayes-Gabriel’s home and terminated her.
He never provided her with a reason for her termination. At the time, she was on FMLA, Hayes-Gabriel claims.
“Plaintiff’s abrupt and unanticipated termination was the culmination of numerous adverse employment actions sustained by Plaintiff during the latter stages of her employment,” her complaint states.
“Those actions were predicated in whole, or in part, on Plaintiff’s sex, race, age and/or her exercise of a federally protected right, to wit, FMLA leave.”
Neither Keys nor any of the other employees with whom he shared login information were terminated, she notes in her filing.
She claims, on numerous occasions, comments were made about her age, such as, “when are you going to retire?”
“Defendant issued a final warning to Plaintiff for merely counseling an employee who was on the verge of exercising her FMLA rights,” the complaint states. “Whereas, on the other hand, Defendant did not merely counsel Plaintiff while she was on FMLA leave, he terminated her.”
Hayes-Gabriel seeks back pay and interest; front pay or reinstatement; and attorney’s fees.
New Orleans attorney Ronald L. Wilson is representing her in the action.
