A one-month employee claims racist remarks, sexual stereotyping, and retaliation
A worker says she was fired after reporting discrimination at a Florida company — by a supervisor who allegedly had white supremacist tattoos.
Legna Soto, who was hired as a Parts Service Writer at Everglades Equipment Group in Orlando, lasted roughly one month on the job. In a federal lawsuit filed on March 25, she alleges the company terminated her after she raised concerns about her supervisor's conduct — conduct she says was driven by racism and bias against Hispanic women.
According to court filings in Soto v. Everglades Equipment Group and Design d/b/a Everglades Equipment Group (Case No. 6:26-cv-00641, M.D. Fla.), Soto started work on or about June 10, 2024, and was let go on or about July 10, 2024. During that brief window, she alleges her supervisor, Charles Russell, spoke to her in a derogatory manner, refused to help with job-related questions, and told her to "figure it out" when she sought guidance.
The allegations go further. Soto claims Russell made comments she believed showed a clear bias against Hispanics, including criticizing a white employee, Landis Surber, for marrying a Hispanic woman. She also alleges Russell often discussed sexual fantasies involving Hispanic women, which she understood to be rooted in racial stereotypes.
What may draw the most attention in HR circles is this: the lawsuit alleges Russell had an "SS lightning bolts" tattoo on his left forearm and a "white supremacist worldwide" tattoo on his right forearm — symbols widely recognized as white supremacist insignia. The filing describes these as outward signs of bigotry that Russell was unashamed about.
Soto alleges she was the only Hispanic woman on her team and had no performance or disciplinary issues. She says she brought her concerns to Mike Dacato, Russell's supervisor, reporting that she was being discriminated against and not being given a fair opportunity to succeed at the company. According to the lawsuit, after Russell learned of her report, her employment was terminated.
The case raises 14 counts under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Section 1981, and the Florida Civil Rights Act, covering race, national origin, and gender discrimination, as well as retaliation. Soto is seeking back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, and other relief.
No determination has been made in the case, and the claims remain unproven allegations at this stage.
For HR professionals, the case is a pointed reminder that the gap between an employee raising a concern and the employer's next move can carry enormous legal weight. When a worker flags discriminatory treatment — particularly involving conduct as overt as what is alleged here — how the organization responds may define its exposure for years to come.
It also raises a question worth sitting with: if a supervisor's extremist affiliations are in plain sight, at what point does an employer's inaction become part of the problem?
