ST. LOUIS — A former Express Scripts employee has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the company discriminated against her based on race and age, subjected her to a hostile work environment, retaliated against her for reporting alleged discrimination and ultimately terminated her employment after more than 15 years with the organization.
According to the complaint filed June 9 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Danita Davis, an African American woman and St. Louis resident, alleges that Express Scripts engaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Davis worked for Express Scripts from Oct. 26, 2009, until her termination on Feb. 3, 2025.
During her tenure, she advanced from a Testing Operations Analyst position to Quality Review and Audit Lead Analyst.
In that role, she was responsible for large-scale testing projects, implementation testing, quality reviews, communications with leadership and process improvement initiatives, according to the lawsuit.
The complaint states that she generally performed well and did not experience significant employment issues for most of her career with the company.
The lawsuit alleges that circumstances changed after Davis began reporting in April 2023 to a senior manager identified in the complaint as Crissy Nyhof.
Shortly thereafter, according to the filing, Davis and another African American female employee were criticized for allegedly failing to meet deliverables and were warned that disciplinary coaching could follow. Davis received formal performance coaching in May 2023 and a verbal warning the following month.
The complaint acknowledges that she later demonstrated improvement and that a formal performance improvement plan was not implemented at that time.
Davis alleges that in May 2024, she and another African American colleague received coaching plans related to an overdue deliverable, while employees with similar performance issues were not disciplined.
On June 10, 2024, she filed an internal ethics complaint alleging that the discipline was racially motivated because, according to the lawsuit, white employees who performed similarly or worse were not subjected to comparable corrective action.
The complaint states that Employee Relations ultimately concluded there was no evidence of discrimination and closed the investigation in July 2024.
The lawsuit further alleges that the treatment of Davis worsened after she filed the ethics complaint.
Davis claims that white employees with comparable or poorer performance records were not disciplined, while African American employees were singled out. She also alleges that a Caucasian employee with chronic attendance issues was not disciplined despite not being assigned projects.
According to the complaint, Davis was assigned a project involving testing input templates in September 2024, and she contends that the expectations and scope of the assignment repeatedly changed.
She received a second verbal warning in October 2024 and was placed on a formal performance improvement plan in November 2024.
Davis alleges that the plan lacked objective measures and was not meaningfully followed. At the same time, she claims she continued to be considered for higher-level positions and received performance-based awards.
In November 2024, Davis filed a second internal ethics complaint alleging that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment since May 2023.
The lawsuit states that she reported experiencing anxiety that affected her work performance, sleep, and mood.
She also requested reassignment to another department or role, a request that was denied, according to the filing.
Employee Relations later concluded there was no evidence of a hostile work environment, discrimination, or policy violations.
Davis alleges she was never contacted by an investigator during that inquiry.
The complaint states that Davis was terminated during a meeting on Feb. 3, 2025, after being told she had failed to meet the standards outlined in the performance improvement plan.
Davis contends that the stated reason for her termination was pretextual and that the decision was connected to her complaints about alleged discrimination.
She further alleges that other employees of color and employees over the age of 40 experienced similar treatment under the same manager, with some resigning or losing their jobs.
At the time of her termination, Davis was 56 years old.
Davis seeks back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, litigation costs and injunctive relief, including reinstatement to her former position or front pay instead of reinstatement. She is represented by Alan G. Crone and Alexander William Gass of Barrett & Farahany.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri: 4:26-cv-00894
