The Employee Survival Guide® is the no-nonsense employment law podcast made exclusively for employees. After 200+ episodes, we deliver the straight talk your employer and HR don’t want you to hear — covering every work and career issue that actually matters.
Hosted and produced by Mark Carey, a veteran employment lawyer with 29 years of experience who has litigated hundreds of cases — including class actions — in state and federal courts nationwide. Mark cuts through the BS with blunt, practical advice, always presenting both sides so you can make informed decisions. This podcast is also about your employment story and other courageous employees who have spoken out about their employers. If you work for a living, this is your podcast.
Now you can use our newly created AI agent to ask questions about your job and legal claims and receive answers based on our entire catalogue of podcast episodes and the full content from our extensive website.
Subscribe to our employee podcast show in your favorite podcast app including Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide ® please like us on Facebook, X and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this employee podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Thank you!
What happens when a dream job turns into a nightmare after a cancer diagnosis? Join Mark Carey and his co-host as they unravel the shocking case of Leah Lando, a veteran news anchor who faced brutal discrimination and retaliation while undergoing cancer treatment. Leah's story is not just a personal battle; it highlights a toxic work culture that can exist in even the most prestigious organizations. After being heavily recruited by Scripps Media, Leah uprooted her life for what she thought was a golden opportunity, only to find herself in a hostile work environment marked by exclusion and interrogation about her medical condition.
This episode dives deep into the systemic issues of discrimination that plague workplaces, particularly focusing on gender and age discrimination, as well as the devastating impact of retaliation when employees are vulnerable. Leah’s experience serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of employee rights and the need for companies to foster a supportive culture, especially for those undergoing serious health challenges like cancer treatment. The hosts dissect how management, particularly the station manager, not only failed to provide reasonable accommodation but actively worked to build a case for Leah's termination while she was undergoing treatment.
As they navigate the legal implications of Leah's firing, the discussion also sheds light on broader patterns of workplace discrimination that affect older women and individuals with disabilities. The court found Leah's claims plausible, emphasizing the critical need for employee advocacy and awareness around workplace rights. This episode is a must-listen for anyone navigating employment disputes, especially those dealing with cancer treatment or similar challenges. Tune in for insider tips on negotiating severance, understanding employment contracts, and recognizing the signs of a toxic workplace culture.
Whether you’re an employee fighting for your rights, an advocate for workplace change, or simply someone interested in the intersection of health and employment law, this episode of the Employee Survival Guide® is packed with essential insights. Discover how to empower yourself in the face of adversity, understand your legal rights, and learn how to navigate the complexities of employment law. Don’t let discrimination define your career—join us as we explore the vital steps to ensuring a healthier work environment for everyone.
If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, X and LinkedIn.
We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Leaving a review will help other employees find the Employee Survival Guide.
Welcome to the Employee Survival Guide, produced by Employment Attorney Mark Carey.
SPEAKER_00
Glad to be here for this one.
SPEAKER_02
Yeah, we have a really intense one today. So I want you to imagine landing what looks like the absolute dream job. Like you are recruited heavily.
SPEAKER_00
Right. They're really chasing you.
SPEAKER_02
Exactly. You uproot your entire family, you sell your home in a city you love, and you do all of this based on an ironclad promise from executives that you are going to retire there.
SPEAKER_00
Which is huge.
SPEAKER_02
That's a massive life change.
SPEAKER_00
It's a massive change.
SPEAKER_02
You think you are completely set for the rest of your career. And then the unthinkable happens. You're diagnosed with a rare cancer.
SPEAKER_01
Oh wow.
SPEAKER_02
Yeah. But instead of rallying around you, or just, you know, offering basic human decency, your workplace environment suddenly turns completely toxic.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell It's just wild how fast it shifts.
SPEAKER_02
It really is. And it all culminates in this shocking termination while you are literally sitting in the cancer center for a medical appointment.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Honestly, it sounds like the plot of a corporate thriller, but it is the stark reality detailed in the legal documents we are exploring today.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Yeah, we are looking at an amended, verified complaint and a federal court decision in the case of Leah Lando versus Scripps Media Inc.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell And the details are just they're staggering.
SPEAKER_02
Our mission today is to explore these highly dramatic, factual allegations purely from the employees' perspective. We really want to reveal the dark patterns that some employers use to get rid of unwanted employees based on sex, age, and disability.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell We're basically opening up their playbook.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell Exactly. Because with facts this dramatic, the big question for us today is what was this employer thinking they could get away with here?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Seriously. To understand their mindset, I mean we have to look at the timeline because it reveals just how many different justifications the employer tried to layer on top of each other.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell Right, to make it look like a standard neutral business decision.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Exactly. So let's start with who Leah Lando is. We are talking about a 48-year-old female veteran news anchor.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell She brings like over two decades of experience in the news industry to the table.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Yeah, she is highly established. And in May 2022, she gets hired by WKBWTV, which is a script media station in Buffalo, New York.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell And taking that job, it was a massive life disruption for her. She ends her contract in Rochester, she sells her family home and moves.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell You definitely don't do that on a whim.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell No, you do that because station leadership, specifically the news director and the general manager, are making these explicit promises that she is going to have a long career and retire in Buffalo.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Which really establishes her incredibly high value to the station at the time they hired her. I mean, they wanted her enough to convince her to completely uproot her life.
SPEAKER_02
Right.
SPEAKER_00
And according to the complaint, the honeymoon phase was real. She was the evening anchor, getting extremely positive feedback on her performance. Everything was going according to plan until about April 2023.
Aaron Powell And that is when Lando is diagnosed with cutaneous T cell lymphoma or CTCL. It's a rare form of cancer, and it obviously requires her to take intermittent time off for treatments and doctor visits.
SPEAKER_00
Naturally.
SPEAKER_02
Now, if you are listening to this, you might assume that if you get a scary diagnosis, your HR department and your boss are going to sit down and talk about reasonable accommodations.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell That's what should happen.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell But the immediate shift in her employer's behavior here is just startling.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Yeah. The complaint alleges this swift and frankly brutal transition to a hostile work environment. And this was allegedly spearheaded by the new station manager, Leanne Markin.
SPEAKER_01
Aaron Powell And she doesn't just ask how Lando is feeling, right?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell No, not at all. According to the lawsuit, Markin begins constantly questioning Lando about her medical condition after almost every single day she takes off. Aaron Powell That sounds exhausting. Aaron Powell It gets worse. She goes as far as interrogating Lando's co-workers about Lando's cancer and her appointments, demanding specific, highly uncomfortable personal information.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell It's literally like a predator smelling blood in the water. I mean, it's like an insurance adjuster looking for a pre-existing crack in the foundation of your house so they can deny your claim.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell That is a perfect way to put it.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell They aren't checking in on her health. They are surveying for liabilities so they can build a case for demolition. But why do employers default to this kind of invasive interrogation rather than simple support?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Well, because an employer knows they cannot legally fire someone simply for getting sick. That is blatantly illegal under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Right. They need a loophole.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Exactly. So if the employer views this new medical reality as a burden, they have to construct a different reason to push the employee out. They start building a pretextual case.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell And how does that actually work in practice?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Well By constantly scrutinizing the employee's physical presence, uh questioning their whereabouts, and prying into their medical specifics, management basically accomplishes two things.
SPEAKER_01
Aaron Ross Powell Okay. What are they?
SPEAKER_00
First, they manufacture a paper trail of perceived unreliability or absenteeism. And second, they make the employee feel like an absolute burden to the team.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell, which is incredibly isolating.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell I mean it's basically psychological warfare disguised as a manager just checking in.
SPEAKER_02
Yeah, exactly. So they are building this paper trail of unreliability. Does it stay passive aggressive or does it like escalate?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Oh, it definitely shifts into active isolation. Lando alleges she was suddenly excluded from what they call skip line meetings and promotional campaigns.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Which is a big deal for an anchor, right?
SPEAKER_00
A huge deal. For an evening anchor, being the face of the station is the core of the job. So excluding her from promotional campaigns is a deliberate degrading of her standing in the company.
SPEAKER_02
You cut them out of the visible parts to diminish their perceived value.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Exactly. Because later on that makes it so much easier to turn around and say, well, she wasn't that critical to our operations anyway.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell But if you are the employee sitting in the middle of this, it has to be incredibly confusing because of the mixed signals being sent, right?
SPEAKER_00
Oh, totally. The lawsuit points out that while station manager Leanne Markin is being outright hostile, the news director, Aaron Mason, is actively assuring Lando that her contract is going to be renewed.
SPEAKER_02
Wait, really?
SPEAKER_00
Yeah. And the head recruiter even leaves a voicemail praising how valuable Lando is to the station, promising other opportunities if she ever considered leaving Buffalo.
SPEAKER_02
Is the left hand just not talking to the right hand here, or is this intentional?
SPEAKER_00
Honestly, those mixed signals are actually a classic corporate stall tactic. When you get praise from recruitment and assurances from your direct director, but you're being iced out by the station manager, you are kept completely off balance.
SPEAKER_01
You just don't know where you stand.
SPEAKER_00
Right. And the employer benefits from this confusion because it delays the employee from taking legal action or looking for another job. You kind of hold on to that positive reinforcement, hoping the hostilities just to phase.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Well, Lando doesn't just wait around to find
out. She takes action. On February 25th, 2025, she reaches out to human resources to formally complain that she is being discriminated against.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Which is a crucial step.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Yeah. And around the same time, she fills out an employee satisfaction survey. She explicitly names Leanne Markin and details the uncomfortable interrogations about her cancer.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell And by doing that, she is engaged in what the law calls protected activity. She has formally put the company on notice of alleged discrimination.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell But the response from the company is just it's breathtaking. Just over a week later, on March 4, 2025, Lando is terminated.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Just days later.
SPEAKER_02
Two months before her contract is even set to expire. But it's not just the firing, it's the shocking climax of how it happened. Let's set the scene here.
SPEAKER_00
This part is brutal.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell Lando learns of her termination while she is actively attending medical appointments at Roswell Park Cancer Center. Management knew she was out for medical reasons that day.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell They knew exactly where she was.
SPEAKER_02
And Markin actually announces the firing to the entire station while Lando is sitting at the doctor's office.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell The proximity between her complaint to HR on February 25th and her termination on March 4th is just a matter of days. In the eyes of the court, an adverse employment action following that closely on the heels of a protected complaint is the textbook definition of unlawful retaliation.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell It's a glaring red flag.
SPEAKER_00
Trevor Burrus It raises a massive red flag that the firing was a direct punishment for speaking up.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell The sheer audacity of an employer standing up and announcing a termination to the company while they know the employee is sitting in a cancer center for treatment is stunning.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell It really is.
SPEAKER_02
It feels designed to be as humiliating as possible. It sends this chilling message to the rest of the staff, like this is what happens when you complain, regardless of your personal circumstances.
SPEAKER_00
But legally, you know, the employer cannot walk into a courtroom and admit it was retaliation. They desperately need a shield. Aaron Powell Right.
SPEAKER_02
They need a cover story. Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00
Yeah. They need a neutral business-related excuse for why they let her go.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Okay, let me play devil's advocate for a second here. Local news is struggling financially across the country. Broadcasters are losing ad revenue, and layoffs are a very real part of the industry right now.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell That's true. It is an industry-wide issue.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell So how do we know this wasn't just a genuinely unfortunate budget cut that caught her at the worst possible time?
Because the station claimed Lando was fired to save money as part of a company-wide layoff, asserting she was the least senior anchor.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Well, if we look closely at the facts alleged in the complaint, that defense starts to look like a highly orchestrated shell game.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Ross Powell A shell game.
SPEAKER_00
Yeah. Courts will look at who was retained and who was let go to see if the financial excuse actually holds water. The lawsuit points out that Michael Wooten, a 40-year-old male anchor, was hired after Lando.
SPEAKER_01
Okay.
SPEAKER_00
Yet he kept his job. If seniority was the true metric, he should have been let go first.
SPEAKER_02
That's a huge contradiction.
SPEAKER_00
And then there is the situation with Taylor Epps, a 25-year-old female hired in 2019. She had the same anchor reporter title as Lando. Right. If the station is laying off the least senior anchor, you would think Epps is on the chopping block, or at least evaluated alongside Lando. And here is where the mechanics of that title shell game really come into play. Just one month before these layoffs, Markin changes Epps' title to senior reporter. Just one month. Yep. However, according to the complaint, Epps continued doing the exact same anchor work despite the new title. Wow. The lawsuit alleges that this title change was orchestrated specifically to protect Epps from the anchor layoffs. If not for that perfectly timed title change, Epps, not Lando, would have been the least senior anchor.
SPEAKER_02
That is a blatant manipulation of the roster to protect a younger employee. But let's look at this phantom financial crisis they claim necessitated the layoffs in the first place.
SPEAKER_00
Oh, this part is very revealing.
SPEAKER_02
They fire Lando on March 4th to save money. Exactly one week later, on March 11th, Marken creates two brand new internal positions. One of them is an executive reporter role paying $96,000 a year.
SPEAKER_00
Yep.
SPEAKER_02
How do you justify creating a $96,000 position seven days after firing someone for budget reasons and then handpicking a male employee for it?
SPEAKER_00
And the male employee handpicked for it was Adam Francis, who had also been laid off in that same sweep.
SPEAKER_02
Wait, he was part of the layoffs too?
SPEAKER_00
He was. And he was actively encouraged by the company to apply for this newly created highly paid role, and he got it. This is a classic dark pattern. Employers will use a broad company-wide restructuring to bypass seniority rules.
SPEAKER_02
So they basically launder the termination.
SPEAKER_00
Exactly. They lay off the person they want to target alongside a few others to make it look legitimate, and then immediately create parallel highly paid roles to rehire the people they actually want to keep.
SPEAKER_02
And Lando actually sees these new jobs posted. She reaches out to the news director, Aaron Mason, and asks if she can apply.
SPEAKER_00
And what does he say?
SPEAKER_02
His response is, I don't want to get too excited, but let me check. And then he completely ghosted her. She never hears back. Aaron Powell Wow, just silence. To top it all off, WKBW removed Lando's name from all of her past stories. The complaint notes this is virtually unprecedented. Reporters normally leave their names on stories long after they move on to other markets.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell just standard industry practice.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell Erasing her name from old archives proves this wasn't just a neutral business decision. It was vindictive. Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00
It really provides the court with a powerful lens into the employer's discriminatory intent. When you look at the retention of a male anchor hired after her, the sudden title change to protect a 25-year-old anchor, the rehiring of a male colleague into a newly created role, and the vindictive erasure of her work, the financial hardship defense completely collapses.
SPEAKER_02
So if you are listening to this and your boss suddenly starts changing job titles right before a rumored budget cut, you need to pay very close attention.
SPEAKER_00
Absolutely.
SPEAKER_02
Because the lawsuit alleges this wasn't just an isolated incident of one bad manager acting out. It points to a systemic practice of undervaluing and replacing older women at this company.
And the most glaring piece of evidence is the staggering pay gap.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Oh, the pay gap is significant here.
SPEAKER_02
Lando discovers through her union representative that her male co-anchor, Jeff Russo, makes approximately forty-two thousand dollars a year more than her.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell Let's break down the timelines to see why that disparity is so legally significant. Lando has over two decades of news anchoring experience, starting right out of college in 2000.
SPEAKER_02
So she's been doing this a long time.
SPEAKER_00
Exactly. Jeff Russo started with a company in 2003 as a sports anchor and didn't even move to news anchoring until 2015.
SPEAKER_02
So their experience is entirely comparable, if not weighted in Lando's favor when it comes to actual news anchoring.
SPEAKER_01
Right.
SPEAKER_02
How does an employer justify a $42,000 pay discrepancy for two people sitting at the exact same desk reading the exact same news to the exact same camera? Lando was making only 75% of his salary.
SPEAKER_00
But the complaint goes further to show how the system specifically targets older women.
SPEAKER_02
Yeah, this isn't a one-off.
SPEAKER_00
No, it cites the case of Joanna Passeri, another female anchor at WKBW, who was allegedly forced out at age 50 and replaced with younger talent. Meanwhile, her male co-anchor, Keith Radford, was allowed to stay until he chose to retire on his own terms.
SPEAKER_02
It paints an incredibly ugly picture of an industry that treats aging men as authoritative and aging women as disposable.
Which brings us to a fascinating legal concept invoked in the lawsuit: sex plus discrimination.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell This is such an important concept for people to understand.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell How does that function differently in a courtroom compared to a standard gender discrimination claim?
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Ross Powell Well, sex plus discrimination means you aren't just claiming you were discriminated against simply for being a woman. You are claiming you were targeted because of an intersection of protected traits.
SPEAKER_02
Okay.
SPEAKER_00
In Lando's case, she's a woman, plus she's older, she's 48, plus she has a disability, the cancer.
SPEAKER_02
Right.
SPEAKER_00
The law recognizes that employers might not discriminate against all women. For example, the employer here could point to Taylor Epps and say, look, we protected the 25-year-old female anchor. We don't hate women.
SPEAKER_02
I see.
SPEAKER_00
Sex Plus bypasses that defense. It allows the plaintiff to say you might not discriminate against young women, but you specifically push out older women or women with medical issues.
SPEAKER_02
Aaron Powell That makes total sense. They can't use the young female employee as a human shield against a discrimination claim when the data shows they are specifically targeting women over 45.
So all of this evidence, this entire shell game, went before a federal judge. The defendant, Scripps Media, filed a motion to dismiss the case, essentially telling the court that Lando's claims were just vague and didn't hold up.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell And Chief Judge Elizabeth A. Walters, Wolford strongly disagreed. The judge issued a decision denying the employer's motion to dismiss the discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims.
SPEAKER_01
So it's moving forward.
SPEAKER_00
It is. Judge Wolford ruled that Lando's factual allegations are highly plausible and raise a reasonable inference of discriminatory motive.
SPEAKER_02
So the court saw right through the employer's layoff excuse.
SPEAKER_00
They absolutely did. The judge noted that the combination of age, gender, and disability made Lando a specific target in an industry that historically devalues older women.
SPEAKER_02
Wow.
SPEAKER_00
Yeah. The court highlighted that being interrogated about medical issues, excluded from core meetings, and fired days after an HR complaint is more than enough evidence of a hostile environment and retaliation to proceed to trial.
SPEAKER_02
I do want to be thorough here and note that the judge did dismiss one single claim, the promissory estoppel claim. That was the claim regarding the promise that she could retire in Buffalo if she moved her family there. Why was that thrown out?
SPEAKER_00
To explain it simply, promissory estoppel is a legal claim you make when someone breaks a promise that you reasonably relied on, causing you harm. Okay. But in New York employment law, you can't sue an employer for breaking a promise if that promise was just the standard bait they used to get you to take the job in the first place.
SPEAKER_01
Oh, I see.
SPEAKER_00
The promise has to be completely separate from the employment relationship itself. Since the promise of a long career was the core reason she accepted the employment, it couldn't stand as a separate legal claim. But the heavy hitters, the discrimination and retaliation claims, survived intact.
If you are listening to this, you might be thinking that the facts of this specific news anchor story are uniquely extreme. And yeah, firing someone while they are literally sitting in a cancer ward is incredibly dramatic.
SPEAKER_00
Extremely.
SPEAKER_02
But the employer's playbook here is something that happens in office parks, retail chains, and Zoom rooms everywhere. You know, sudden title changes for favored employees right before layoffs.
SPEAKER_00
Or intrusive questioning about a medical condition disguised as a manager just checking in.
SPEAKER_02
Exactly. Or using a broad company-wide restructuring to cover up a targeted retaliation against one specific person who had the courage to complain to HR.
SPEAKER_00
Aaron Powell It is a stark reminder that documentation is your absolute best defense. Recognizing these patterns early, like when the mixed signals start, and HR is praising you, but your direct manager is isolating you, is critical. That is the moment to start keeping a meticulous record.
SPEAKER_02
And consider the employer's vindictive decision to erase Lando's name from her past news stories. It was an unprecedented move in their newsroom.
SPEAKER_00
A huge misstep on their part.
SPEAKER_02
Really, though, what does it say about corporate culture when an employer is so desperate to erase an unwanted employee's legacy that in their rush to scrub her from the archives, they accidentally leave behind a perfectly documented, glaring paper trail of retaliation for a federal judge to find. Such a powerful point to end on. Thank you for joining us today for this exploration of the Employee Survival Guide. Stay informed, protect yourself, and we'll see you next time.
