Another Woman Files Suit Against Paul Mihailides, and The Preserve’s Construction Unit
Monday, November 20, 2023
Paul Mihailides, the CEO of The Preserve Sporting Club, has been hit with another lawsuit by a woman alleging a hostile work environment tied to sexual harassment, discrimination based on sex quid pro quo sexual harassment, discrimination based on sex — disparate treatment, and other claims.
The five-count complaint was filed in Rhode Island Superior Court.
Besides Mihailides, also named in the suit is the company that does much of the construction at The Preserve and, according to Rhode Island business records, is controlled by Mihailides -- M.T.M. Development Corporation.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTThe woman filing the latest suit, Heidi Grant, worked for M.T.M.
This is the second lawsuit filed by a woman against Mihailides in the past five months.
Now, with Grant's lawsuit, the number of women making allegations of sexual harassment is three.
Sexual Harassment Previously Alleged
In July, a former top executive at The Preserve Sporting Club & Residences claimed in a ten-count federal lawsuit that she was repeatedly sexually harassed and publicly humiliated by Mihailides.
According to Alison McDaniel's lawsuit, she was hired for a top marketing position at The Preserve, and alleges she was then subject to nearly non-stop graphic sexual harassment.
“Mihailides hired McDaniel to perform the following job duties at The Preserve: Acting as a Spokesperson for The Preserve; acting in commercials; creating and appearing in videos for social media; providing her image for print, social media, advertisements, and magazines; acting as the social media manager; appearing at special events; appearing in videos for the Sporting Shoppe located on The Preserve property," and other marketing assignments, according to the lawsuit.
But McDaniel alleges in the lawsuit that Mihailides and the company created a hostile, abusive work environment in which Mihailides repeatedly sexually harassed her -- and retaliated against her when she rebuffed his advances.
The Preserve and Mihailides have counter-sued McDaniel.
Second Woman's Allegation
According to McDaniel’s lawsuit, she is not the only woman at The Preserve that Mihailides subjected to a hostile work environment based on sex.
“Mihailides made unwelcome, offensive, sexual comments to a former Preserve employee named Alexandra Beahm ('Beahm'). Mihailides also touched Beahm in a sexual manner that was unwelcome and offensive. During Beahm’s employment, Mihailides approached her in the workplace on numerous occasions and tickled her which she found to be unwelcome and offensive,” stated the suit.
“On one occasion, Mihailides got on his knees so he could reach underneath Beahm’s desk so he could tickle her feet. Mihailides told Beahm to lower her COVID mask in the presence of others so she could show her ‘pretty face.’ On another occasion, Mihailides made a joke about the size of his penis while he was in the presence of Beahm and a client,” claims the suit.
Heidi Grant’s Suit
According to the latest suit filed by Grant:
The Preserve is a luxury resort located in Richmond, Rhode Island where guests can stay in luxury upscale accommodations, enjoy fine dining and luxury spa services, and participate in outdoor, year-round activities such as fishing, clay shooting, indoor target practice, equestrian, hiking, and golf.
Defendant M.T.M. handles new construction at The Preserve including, but not limited to, the construction of condominiums, cottages, roads, and other structures.
At all times relevant to this matter, Mihailides was the President of Defendant M.T.M. and controlled all aspects of its operations, including the hiring and firing of employees such as Grant.
In or about late September 2021/early October 2021, Grant began working for Defendant M.T.M as a “Construction Coordinator.”
According to Grant's suit:
At all times relevant to this matter, Grant worked with a supervisor named Andrew Semple (“Semple”), a Project Manager employed by Defendant M.T.M.
Grant claims that almost immediately after her employment commenced, Semple, who is approximately twenty (20) years older than Grant, began to act inappropriately towards her.
Grant claims that Semple touched her hair and shoulders without her consent.
Grant claims that Semple would text her frequently after work hours for non-work-related matters.
During the week ending October 22, 2021, while Grant was at her desk, Eric Northup (“Northup”), the Director of Operations at M.T.M., said to her: “We have a bet going to see if it’s going to be Andy Semple or Mike Brown who gets with you” or words to that effect.
Grant claims Northup made this comment in the presence of her direct supervisor, Nikki Mihailides (“Nikki”) -- the daughter of Paul Mihailides.
She claims Nikki laughed when she heard Northup’s comment.
When Grant left work, she felt “grossed out” and “mortified.”
On or about October 29, 2021, Semple invited Grant to dinner, which she declined.
On or about October 30, 2021, at 11:30 PM, Semple texted Grant and invited her to his hotel suite at the Hilltop Hotel at The Preserve, where he lived, which she declined.
On or about November 1, 2021, at the Hilltop Building at The Preserve, Semple tried to kiss Grant on the lips, which she rebuffed.
On or about November 2, 2021, Grant met Semple for dinner at the Rathskellar Restaurant in Charlestown, Rhode Island, which she reasonably believed to be a business meeting.
After dinner, Semple texted Grant and invited her to his hotel suite, which she declined.
Grant says in the suit that, after Grant agreed to go out to dinner with Semple, Grant claims there was a noticeable difference in how Semple treated her at work.
Grant claims Semple was more attentive to her at work – he spent more one-on-one time with her; he provided her with much-needed coaching; and he gave her the tools she needed to perform her job duties more effectively.
She says in the claims that after she agreed to go out with Semple, she had the best week of work she had since she started working at M.T.M. and that “it was like night and day.”
On or about November 3, 2021, Grant informed Nikki that Semple had asked her out several times, that he invited her to his hotel suite, and that she believed his conduct was “inappropriate” and made her feel “uncomfortable” (the “sexual harassment complaint”).
Nikki told Grant that she had heard that Semple had asked her out several times.
Grant claims that Nikki and Semple are close friends and that Nikki referred to Semple as her “work husband.”
Grant claims that Nikki appeared to be delighted upon learning that Semple had asked her out several times, claiming in an excited voice: “Oh, really? I have to go and talk to Andy!” or words to that effect.
Grant’s suit goes on to allege that later that day, Grant observed Nikki and Semple chatting in a friendly way while sitting on the floor in the Break Room near Nikki’s office.
When Grant noticed Nikki and Semple’s cozy interaction, she reasonably believed that her employer condoned Semple’s behavior.
At no time during Grant’s employment did her employer ever provide her with an employee handbook or policies setting forth the rules of the workplace despite her repeated requests, claims Grant's suit.
The suit adds, during Grant’s employment, M.T.M. did not have a policy or mechanism in place for employees to report sexual harassment in the workplace.
The suit also states that Grant’s employer never conducted a prompt and thorough investigation into the sexual harassment complaint as required by state and federal law.
“Because Grant felt powerless to rebuff Semple’s advances due her employer’s indifference and inaction to her sexual harassment complaint, she reluctantly agreed to go out to dinner with Semple,” claims that suit.
Repeatedly Turned Down Semple and Continued to Be Pressured
Further, Grant reasonably believed that if she turned down Semple’s dinner invites, he may retaliate against her at work by ignoring her or mistreating her.
On or about November 5, 2021, Grant went out to dinner with Semple at the Condesa Restaurante Mexicano in West Warwick, Rhode Island, and against her better judgment, she went back to his hotel suite with him after dinner and engaged in sexual relations with him.
She stayed overnight at Semple’s hotel suite and went to work in the morning.
Grant claims that Semple continued to be attentive and helpful to her at work.
The next day, Grant went back to Semple’s hotel suite at lunchtime to retrieve the leftovers she left in his refrigerator from dinner the previous night.
When Grant was exiting the Hilltop Hotel, she walked past Phil Santomaro (“Santomaro”), the Director of Hospitality at The Preserve, as he was entering the building.
Upon information and belief, Santomaro notified Mihailides that he had seen Grant leaving the Hilltop building.
According to Grant’s lawsuit: later that day, Mihailides met with Semple to confront him about his relationship with Grant.
During this meeting, Semple admitted that Grant stayed over his hotel suite the previous night.
During the meeting, Mihailides berated Semple for sleeping with a co-worker, claiming that he had recently settled a sexual harassment lawsuit and that Semple’s conduct could subject him to another lawsuit.
Mihailides yelled at Semple: “I should fire you!” or words to that effect, claims Grant's suit.
However, Mihailides did not fire Semple.
Immediately after Semple left the meeting, her called Grant on her cell phone and told her all the details of his meeting with Mihailides, including Mihailides’ threat that he should fire Semple.
Approximately ten minutes later, Nikki called Grant into her office and told Grant: “We’re going to have to let you go” or words to that effect.
Further, the suit alleges:
When Grant asked Nikki for a specific reason why she was being fired, Nikki stated: “It’s just not working out” or words to that effect.
However, during Grant’s second job interview, Grant claims Nikki stated to her: “If the Construction Coordinator position doesn’t work out, or if [Grant is] ‘not feeling it,’ then [we] have hundreds of other jobs, and we would find a position where [she was] satisfied” or words to that effect.
Grant claims Nikki further stated to her: “This is why people stay and work here for a long time. We’re always willing to find where people do best with their skills and are happy” or words to that effect.
Grant claims Defendant Mihailides told her that if she updated and maintained a construction management software called “BuilderTrend” over the next 3 months, then he would double her salary and give her “huge raises” each subsequent year.
Grant claims that she was able to update the BuilderTrend software prior to her termination.
Prior to Grant’s termination, no supervisor at Defendant M.T.M. ever informed her that her work performance was unsatisfactory or deficient in any way.
Defendant M.T.M. never informed Grant that engaging in romantic or sexual relationships with co-workers or supervisors was prohibited conduct or grounds for termination.
At the time of Grant’s termination, Defendant M.T.M. had the continuing need for the position of Construction Coordinator.
Upon information and belief, Semple was never disciplined in any way for engaging in inappropriate conduct towards Grant.
Upon information and belief, Semple was never disciplined in any way for engaging in a romantic or sexual relationship with Grant.
Defendants’ actionable conduct complained of herein proximately caused Grant to suffer grave and substantial pecuniary damages, including lost wages, bonuses, commissions, fringe benefits, vacation pay, as well as other pecuniary damages, now, and in the future.
Defendants’ actionable conduct complained of herein forced Grant to suffer substantial compensatory damages, including personal emotional pain, personal suffering, personal inconvenience and discomfort, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, embarrassment, adverse working conditions, offensive working conditions, abusive working conditions, stress anticipating the next confrontational incident of workplace harassment, despair regarding Grant’s inability to stop or limit the continuing workplace harassment, fear and discomfort triggered by suffering a loss of income, fear regarding Grant’s ability to find new suitable employment, anguish, frustration, and other severe non-pecuniary losses, now, and in the future, as well as future pecuniary losses.
The conduct of each Defendant warrants the imposition of statutory punitive or exemplary damages, because Defendants intentionally and maliciously and without justification or excuse subjected Grant to discriminatory terms and conditions of employment, harassed Grant because of her sex and illegally retaliated against Grant for reporting sexual harassment, thereby demonstrating each Defendants’ reckless and callous indifference to Grant’s right to work in an environment free from unlawful gender discrimination, and demonstrating each Defendants’ malice or ill will.
GoLocal reached out to Paul Mihailides for comment. He did not respond.
This story was first published 11/19/23 6:30 AM
Related Articles
- 10 Count Federal Lawsuit Accuses Paul Mihailides of The Preserve of Sexual Harassment
- Lawyer for Mihailides & The Preserve Responds to Sexual Harassment Lawsuit, Will File Counterclaims
- Multiple Women Have Come Forward Now, Says Lawyer for Woman Suing The Preserve for Sexual Harassment
- Celebrity Chef David Burke’s Name Removed From Restaurant at The Preserve
