Dentist office faces lawsuit for alleged religious discrimination

By Meg Peters
Review Co-Editor
Four former employees of Dr. Tina Marshall D.D.S. are seeking damages for alleged religious discrimination in a lawsuit against the Lake Orion dentist.
Plaintiffs Kimberly Hinson, Nancy Kordus, Tammy Kulis and Sara Bambard are also suing Dr. Craig Stasio who helped Marshall restructure her office and its employees in 2015.
Stasio is a state registered chiropractor who owns a chiropractic and massage therapy business in Clinton Township, and is also the leader of a religious ministry.
The lawsuit was filed with the 6th’Judicial Circuit of Oakland County. A jury trial was requested and may occur later this summer.
During a restructuring of the dental office, almost all of Marshall’s previous employees were fired or resigned, apart from one dental hygienist who still works for the practice.
Of the plaintiffs, Hansin had worked for the practice, previously ran by Dr. Raphael Flajole, as a dental hygienist for about 32 years. Kordus began working for the practice as a dental assistant in about 1993, and Kulis at the front desk in 1994. The three became employees of Marshall when she purchased the practice in 2008. Bambard began working for Marshall in 2011 at the front desk.
‘My old staff was great. I wish they would have stayed and liked the music, but it was their choice,? Marshall said.
She is referring to the Christian music she began playing during office hours, which many of her staff had requested to turn off, and actually turned off, numerous times.
According to the lawsuit Marshall began playing the Christian music after she and her daughter Brittney joined Stasio’s ministry sometime in 2013.
At first, the music only played during part of the day, the lawsuit states, however in time Marshall ordered the religious music be played at all times.
‘I told her I did not think it was right to play the music all the time, as we had a wide range of religious beliefs as patients.? She told me ‘you have to plant the seeds? and the music had to be played 24/7 even if no one was in the building ‘to keep the demons out,?? Kordus said in a statement.
Marshall said playing the music was something she wanted to do at her practice, and was not meant to influence or brainwash anybody. More importantly, it is soothing to many patients.
‘Playing the Christian music is just to keep God on your mind. It’s just soothing to the spirit. I can’t tell you how many patients I have come in and just make comments that it is so calm in here. They’re like, ‘I’m at a dentist office. This is weird.? And we just smile,? she said.
Later she explained, ‘This is no more than church. If you go to church, that’s what they’re doing, is teaching you from the Bible and trying to make you more aware of the truth from the Bible.?
The lawsuit also states Marshall conducted daily morning prayers with the staff members, which started off as optional but soon became mandatory for all employees.
?’It’s never been mandatory. And it’s never been more than just praying for a great day, that it runs smooth,? Marshall said.
The lawsuit also alleges that Marshall would pray over patients receiving dental treatment, hung religious pictures in her office, placed holy water at her front desk, and maintained a diary of religious activity that occurred at her practice. The front cover of the diary stated ‘The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.?
One example of an excerpt of the diary according to the lawsuit states: ‘Nancy and Kristen realize there is only one God and that He is real and that Hell is real too.?
Another example of a diary excerpt states: ‘Pray Holy Spirit is present over the office at all times’especially’tomorrow’with prayer for our patients’or seeds be planted.?
The lawsuit also notes that each of the plaintiffs consistently objected to the religious practices during office hours.
In 2014, Kordus provided written requests that Marshall refrain from pressuring staff from participating in the ministry’s religious activities, and on August 21, 2014 Kordus was fired.
Kulis? employment was constructively terminated on Oct. 30, 2014, the lawsuit states, as she was compelled to leave due to the religious harassment and discriminatory practices.?
After a couple of her employees were terminated, Marshall had to replace them with interim employees who weren’t as trained as they had claimed, Marshall said.
With her current employees resisting the Christian music, and her interim employees not qualified enough, Marshall turned to Stasio.
‘That’s when I was like this isn’t working, Craig can you help me, and it worked out great,? Marshall said.
Marshall brought in Stasio and after two weeks the practice was restructured. Members of the religious ministry replaced the eight positions that were terminated, with the one employee remaining on as a dental hygienist.
According to the lawsuit, Bambard was called into Marshall’s office July 6, 2015, where she met Stasio. At that time Marshall told Bambard that Stasio was in charge, the lawsuit says. Stasio, according to the lawsuit, held up a stack of financial records to demonstrate how much control he had over the practice, and told Bambard she would be the new office manager and she would have to fire several other staff members. She claimed she was told she would also would be required to find new employees that would be accepting of the religious practices. To ensure this, Stasio participated in the hiring process, according to the lawsuit.
‘On’July 16, Hinson was fired.
The lawsuit states: ‘Defendant Stasio was enlisted to provide the ‘help? Dr. Marshall needed in terminating the staff members that objected being exposed to the practices and beliefs of the ministry. Specifically, in regards to Plaintiff’s objections to the Christian music, Defendant Craig Stasio stated to a journalist: ‘If she wanted to put a water fountain on one side of the office, and they wanted it on the other, that can’t happen.? Stasio added that Dr. Marshall “felt like a prisoner in her own office and that her employees were incompetent and disobeying Dr. Marshall.?
The lawsuit cites three counts of discrimination in violation of the Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act.?
The first count cites religious discrimination, with the other two counts alleging age discrimination, and retaliation and conspiracy under the act. ??
According to the lawsuit, civil rights were violated when the plaintiffs were exposed to ‘unwelcome harassment because of their religion?; ‘failing to take prompt and effective action to cease the harassment?; ‘failing to take reasonable steps to protect plaintiffs from retaliation?; ‘unfairly disciplining and terminating? plaintiffs because of their religion?; and ‘otherwise discriminating against plaintiffs with respect to the terms, conditions and privileges of employment.?
Stasio and Marshall have denied all claims.