Matthew Monette, who managed PopStroke's Myrtle Beach location, alleges the company forced his partner to resign after discovering their relationship, then systematically isolated and undermined him before terminating his employment. According to the complaint filed April 13, PopStroke had no written policy prohibiting workplace relationships and failed to consistently enforce any such restrictions. The suit seeks damages under federal civil rights laws and South Carolina employment statutes.
The complaint paints a picture of escalating retaliation following the disclosure of Monette's relationship. After forcing his partner's resignation, the company 'excluded [Monette] from communications, including operational directives conveyed to other managers but not to him,' according to the filing. His supervisor 'ceased direct communication with him and instead relayed instructions through subordinate managers,' while subjecting him to 'comments referencing his 'personal life choices.'' The isolation was 'ongoing and repeated throughout the final months of his employment, occurring on a near-daily basis.'
The complaint alleges PopStroke's justifications for the termination have 'shifted repeatedly, beginning with vague references to policy violations, then pivoting to financial performance, and ultimately expanding to a series of allegations never documented during Plaintiff's employment.' Monette claims these evolving explanations expose the company's discriminatory motive, particularly given that 'similarly situated managers outside his protected class engaged in actual misconduct, including cohabiting with employees, failing to meet performance expectations, and engaging in workplace misconduct, yet were not terminated or disciplined.'
Monette had worked as general manager with 'significant experience in the local market' and was 'specifically relied upon to manage seasonal fluctuations in business,' the suit states. He received positive feedback, including during a one-on-one evaluation with PopStroke's operations manager shortly before his termination, and was never placed on a performance improvement plan or formally disciplined. The company later 'revised its policies and required employee acknowledgment after Plaintiff's termination,' suggesting acknowledgment of policy gaps.
The complaint challenges PopStroke's stated reasons as pretextual, noting the company 'selectively enforced alleged policies and treated similarly situated managers more favorably.' While withholding Monette's earned bonus, PopStroke 'paid other managers following separation,' the suit alleges. The financial performance justification 'collapses in view of plaintiff's comparator(s),' according to a footnote in the filing that suggests other managers with worse performance were retained.
Monette's federal claims center on sex discrimination and hostile work environment under Title VII, theories that have gained traction since the Supreme Court's 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County extended workplace discrimination protections to sexual orientation. The complaint describes conduct that was 'sufficiently severe and pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of Plaintiff's employment, creating an environment that was intimidating, hostile, and objectively abusive.'
The suit also advances several state law theories, including breach of contract based on employee handbook provisions, violation of South Carolina's Payment of Wages Act for withholding earned bonuses, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Under the wages act, Monette seeks treble damages for what he characterizes as PopStroke's 'willful' failure to pay compensation that had 'vested prior to his termination.' The complaint requests actual damages including back pay and front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, attorney's fees, and a jury trial.