A manager allegedly told the worker to "think twice" before putting complaints on paper
Marriott International is facing a federal lawsuit alleging it fired an employee who repeatedly raised concerns about workplace discrimination.
The case, Sulejmani v. Sodexo, Inc. d/b/a Marriott International, Inc. (No. 1:26-cv-02695), was filed on March 10, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. At its core, it raises a question that should keep any HR leader up at night: what happens when an employee speaks up -- and the organization allegedly looks the other way?
Roaldo Sulejmani worked as an Assistant Rooms Operation Manager, first at The Westin Michigan Ave beginning in August 2024, then at the Marriott Downtown Magnificent Mile after a transfer in May 2025. According to the lawsuit, the trouble started soon after.
The suit alleges Sulejmani flagged multiple incidents of inappropriate conduct by a co-worker to his manager, but no action followed. He, meanwhile, was regularly held accountable for minor infractions. When he escalated concerns about unfair treatment based on race and gender to the general manager in August 2025, the matter was handed off to the hotel manager -- who allegedly ignored it at first.
When that hotel manager did respond, the conversation allegedly took a turn. Rather than addressing the issues, he reportedly dismissed the concerns, described Sulejmani's manager as a "model employee," and told him to "think twice before you put ink on paper." The lawsuit characterizes the remark as intimidation aimed at discouraging further reporting.
From there, the allegations mount. After Sulejmani reported that a co-worker had thrown away his paperwork -- an incident caught on security cameras -- his access to the footage was allegedly restricted, while other managers kept theirs. A separate email accused him of failing to return a company radio, though a follow-up email confirmed the radio had indeed been found.
In late September 2025, Sulejmani was suspended for allegedly swearing at a guest and carrying pepper spray. The lawsuit tells a different story: the individual in question was a trespasser previously banned for domestic violence who had reportedly directed sexual remarks and threats at Sulejmani. The pepper spray, the suit alleges, was never explicitly prohibited, management had long known he carried it, and other employees did the same without consequence.
Sulejmani was terminated on or about October 9, 2025. The lawsuit alleges the decision was driven by his race, sex, and his choice to report discrimination. He is seeking back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial. No determination has been made on the merits of the case.
For HR professionals, the allegations read like a cautionary playbook: complaints that allegedly went nowhere, policies applied unevenly, and the employee who raised the alarm allegedly paying the price. Whatever the outcome, this case is a sharp reminder that how organizations respond to internal complaints can quickly become a matter of public record -- and federal scrutiny.
