Anita Rachvelishvili, a mezzo-soprano from Georgia, has initiated legal action against the Metropolitan Opera and her union, claiming that her contracts were unjustly terminated following a vocal issue she experienced post-childbirth. She also alleges that her union neglected to pursue a grievance against the company on her behalf.
Filed on March 27 in Manhattan’s U.S. District Court, the complaint details the 40-year-old singer’s claim that the Met owes her over $400,000 for canceled performances. These included engagements in esteemed productions such as Verdi’s “Aida” and “Don Carlo,” Bizet’s “Carmen,” and Ponchielli’s “La Gioconda” from 2022 to January 2025. Having made her debut with the Met in 2011, Rachvelishvili has performed with the esteemed opera company approximately 60 times.
According to the lawsuit, Rachvelishvili was only temporarily affected in her upper vocal range due to childbirth but has since regained her full vocal capabilities. Despite her recovery, she alleges that on January 28, 2023, the Met canceled her scheduled performances, citing a supposed decline in her vocal quality.
The legal action further accuses the American Guild of Musical Artists of failing to initiate a grievance process or arbitration concerning a potential breach of contract. Reportedly first disclosed by the website Slipped Disc, the lawsuit contends that the Met breached both federal and state laws, including the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, alongside New York laws against pregnancy discrimination.
Rachvelishvili’s attorney, Len Egert, emphasized the “pay or play” clause in the AGMA agreement, which mandates the Met to honor the contracts financially, regardless of her actual performance. During the same period as the Met’s canceled appearances, Rachvelishvili successfully performed leading roles in prestigious venues across Berlin and Athens.
The case is set to proceed with a pretrial conference on July 1, as scheduled by U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian. While the Met has refrained from commenting due to the ongoing litigation, the AGMA has yet to issue a response.