Skip to content


Kansas Deputy Chief Settles Claims Against Union

A former duty chief with the Topeka Fire Department has settled a portion of her federal gender discrimination lawsuit by dismissing the union from the action.

Deputy Fire Chief Kathy Petty was terminated from the department in February, 2010 during what was termed a budget-driven workforce reduction exercise conducted by the city. She claims the city’s real motive was sexual discrimination and retaliation, and filed a $1.3 million suit against both the city and IAFF Local 83, who she claims supported the city’s actions against her.

The Topeka Capitol Journal is reporting that Chief Petty has reached a mediated settlement with IAFF Local 83, and Local 83 has been dismissed from the case. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed but the paper quoted a court order as saying: “Plaintiff entered into a settlement with Local 83 but the mediation was not successful regarding Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant City of Topeka. Plaintiff and the City have not exchanged further settlement proposals since the mediation.”

More on the story.

More on the original suit.

Posted in Civil Suit, Discrimination, Wrongful termination

Tagged , , , , ,

FDNY Pays $1 million on Gender Discrimination Claim

FDNY has settled a gender discrimination case with five female EMS officers for $1 million. The women claim they were wrongfully passed over for promotion by lesser qualified males.

View more videos at: http://nbcnewyork.com.

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, EMS, Municipal Liability, Promotions

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Another Nazi Salute Case

Another Nazi salute story is in the Fire Law news, this time in Florida.

Lieutenant Bill Figueredo of East Lake Fire Rescue has had his rank restored after having been demoted to firefighter. Lt. Figueredo was accused of rendering a Nazi salute to East Lake Fire Commission Chairman Mark Weinkrantz on December 19, 2012.

In a memo to Fire Chief Tom Jamison about the incident, Commissioner Weinkrantz complained:

In this particular case, the form of harassment involved Lt. Figuerdo and myself. On December, 20, 2012, I was in the hallway of station 57 when a staff meeting broke up. I was standing in the doorway of Chief Genarro's office, when Lt. Figuerdo passed. Upon recognizing me he paused, turned, and initiated a "Nazi salute" in my direction. I immediately responded by saying: Do you have any idea how offensive that is to a Jewish person? Lt. Figuerdo laughed it off and after a brief exchange, wherein I pointed out how the type of behavior was unacceptable, he went to the back of the station and I conducted my business in the offices. This exchange has gnawed at me since. To do nothing might demonstrate that any type of "hate" behavior will be tolerated in the workplace. The trigger to initiate this complaint came with knowledge that Lt. Figueredo routinely uses derogatory terms when referring to Jews and/or me.

However, there appears to be a lot more to the story. Lt. Figueredo not only denied Commissioner Weinkrantz’s allegations against him, but claimed he was offended by the allegations as well. Unbeknownst to Commissioner Weinkrantz, Lt. Figueredo’s  father, brothers and a sister are Jewish. Quoting the EastLakePatch:

The running joke throughout my career here in East Lake has been that although I'm not the token black guy, I am the token Mexican. Racial statements have been made from Mr. Finley and also Mr. Weinkrantz.

The commissioner has harassed me from the day I told him I would not support him personally as I did not believe in his platform. His statement to me was, "aren't you Hispanic or something?" and when I replied "yes", he stated, "Oh and you're a Republican? How can you be a minority and support a war-monger like George Bush?"

Lt. Figueredo also claimed that Weinkrantz threatened to fire him.

In passing, whether it be at Publix or Starbucks or the YMCA or the fire house, he would ask how my job search was going, that he was going to fire me, but I shouldn't worry because "he will put in a letter of recommendation with the lawn maintenance company and the local restaurants because people of my kind should work lawn maintenance, be washing dishes or clean people's houses". …

At times, when I brought this up in conversation with Chief Jamison, his response to me was, "Fig, pick your battles." …

Mr. Finley [another Commissioner] has called me the dirty Puerto Rican, the gay Puerto Rican, the dirty Mexican, gay Mexican and also dirty Cuban. …

Furthermore, while I was on duty at Station 56, Mr. Weinkrantz showed up and delivered a pair of hot pink dumbbells stating, "the reason he bought me hot pink ones was because I'm a faggot and real men don't play tennis".

At a meeting last night, the Commissioners voted 4-0 to restore Lt. Figueredo’s rank and compensate him for back pay while he was demoted. After the meeting he was quoted as saying:

"I'm very grateful that I've been restored to my original position. I'm very grateful that at least part of the truth has come out and I thank the commissioners for at least acknowledging that to this extent."

However, the matter is hardly over. Chief Jamison has requested an independent investigation of racism in the department, and Lt. Figueredo has filed an EEOC complaint with the Pinellas County Office of Human Rights.

More on the story.

Recall the story from last week where an Ohio firefighter, Paul Way of the Shawnee Township Fire Department, claims he was fired because he complained about other firefighters giving the Nazi salute to the fire chief.

Posted in Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Politics, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Sexual Harassment Charges Lead to Guilty Plea for PA Chief

A Pennsylvania fire chief facing criminal charges for sexually harassing three female firefighters has decided to plead guilty rather than face a jury trial.

Nicholas A. Fisher, 33, the fire chief of the Lawrence Park Volunteer Fire Department up until February, has been charged with two offenses, a first-degree misdemeanor count of stalking and a third-degree misdemeanor count of harassment.

The charges stem from events that occurred between November, 2012 and early February, 2013 while Fisher was the chief. He allegedly engaged in unwanted sexual communication and inappropriate physical contact with the women. The unwanted sexual communications included repeated inquiries about the womens' sex lives, sexual comments, sexually explicit text messages, and sending "dirty'' naked pictures.

According to GoErie.com, Fisher has agreed to enter a plea Thursday. He originally sought to enter a deferral program for first time non-violent offenders, but was denied acceptance when the victims objected.

More on the story.

 

Update 5/31/2013: As expected Fisher pled guilty on Thursday, May 30, 2013 to sending three female firefighters sexually explicit text messages and comments. The charges that he grabbed the buttocks of two of the women were dismissed. More on his plea.

Posted in Criminal Law, Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , ,

Cyberbulling Author Offers Some Solutions

 

We have discussed cyberbullying here on a number of occasions. One of our readers send me a link to this interview with an author, Dr. Justin W. Patchin, who has studied cyberbullying – and offers some solutions.

Unfortunately, the cyberbulling that goes on in schools and the kind we see in the fire service are different – so his advice is likely to be of limited usefulness in dealing with co-worker bullying. However, cyberbulling is something many parents are struggling with, so I am posting the interview here.

Happy Memorial Day!!!!


Source: Mobistealth

Posted in cyber-casualty, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Social Media

Tagged ,

FDNY Facing Gender Discrimination Suits

FDNY is currently facing two gender discrimination claims, one from a medic who alleges she was required to perform CPR for 4 hours straight during a training session. Eileen Dechbery also alleges that she fell in a station while 7 months pregnant, and had trouble getting anyone to assist her.

 

(more…)

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged ,

Maryland Suit Alleges Pregnancy Discrimination

A Maryland firefighter-paramedic who was terminated in 2011 following her use of sick leave for her pregnancy has filed suit alleging pregnancy and gender discrimination under state and federal law.

Robin Lancaster filed suit against the Sykesville-Freedom District Fire Department in Carroll County Circuit Court last month. The case was removed to federal court earlier this week at the request of the department.

Lancaster was terminated in November 2011, one month after giving birth to her son. However, her problems began about seven months earlier when she began using sick leave on account of morning sickness and pregnancy-related medical appointments. A fire department board member, Bill Luebberman, cautioned her about her sick leave usage suggesting she may be written up if it continued.

In May of 2011, Lancaster was advised not to lift more than 40 pounds. When she notified Luebberman he informing her via email:

If you have a doctor's note saying that you can not [sic] function as a Paramedic, then it's now time for you to go on sick leave. When sick leave is gone, then revert to annual leave. When that runs out apply for short term disability. We do not have light duty status at Sykesville.

Lancaster was also advised that she was being treated the same as male employees. That issue remains a point of contention between the parties.

After Lancaster had her son in October, 2011 she sought permission to return to work. She emailed Lubberman who replied: "What makes you think that you still have a job at Sykesville?"

The two exchanged additional emails and quoting from the complaint:

Mr. Luebberman responded, "I'm not sure we want you back with us at this time. Board meeting tonight." Mr. Luebbennan never offered any explanation for why SFDFD did not "want her back"- he never referenced poor performance or any elimination of her job. Similarly, the Minutes from the SFDFD Board of Directors meeting offer nothing more than, "EMPLOYEE: We wilI be hiring a full time ALS provider." There is no reference to any performance issues on the part of Ms. Lancaster and it is clear that SFDFFD was looking for a replacement for her position. Ms. Lancaster received a letter from Kevin M. Shiloli (President) on  November 15, 2011 stating, '"The-Employee Board along with the Board of Directors of The Sykesville Freedom District Fire Department regrets to inform  you that your employment with the Sykesville Freedom District Fire Department has been terminated effective November 15, 2011. We however, wish you success in your future endeavors."

The two count complaint alleges that Lancaster’s termination was due to her pregnancy, constituting discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as under Title 20 of the “Maryland State Government Article”.

Here is a copy of the complaint: Lancaster v Sykesville

More on the story.

Incidentally, it appears that Lancaster was the first pregnant employee that Sykesville Freedom District Fire Department has had to deal with. It would also appear that the department was in a reactionary mode in dealing with the issues that commonly arise with pregnant employees.

Departments in such a reactionary mode may be tempted to try to address pregnancy-related leave issues with a cost-management approach in mind. Hint: that is probably not a good idea. Getting good HR and legal advice is critical in such situations.

The best course of action for any fire department is to think through all the implications associated with pregnant employees well in advance of such a situation. That way a policy can be developed at a point in time when there is no particular employee – with the history and baggage that real life employees inevitably introduce – that can add a whole other level of complexity to policy development.

Posted in Civil Suit, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Wrongful termination

Tagged , , , , , ,

Tucson Captain’s Rank Reinstated by Civil Service Commission

 

Here is a follow up to a story we covered two weeks ago. The Tucson captain who was accused of committing lewd acts on a subordinate that led to a $125,000 settlement, has had his rank restored by the local civil service commission following a hearing.

Paramedic firefighter Cody Jenkins claims that he was physically assaulted and harassed three times by Captain Roger Tamietti on November 9, 2012 while working at Station 7. Jenkins filed a $500,000 civil claim against the city in February that was just settled for $125,000.

Captain Tamietti was demoted to firefighter and charged criminally with three misdemeanor counts of assault and harassment.

Yesterday, the civil service commission concluded that the punishment imposed was excessive. Quoting from the Arizona Daily Star:

Tamietti fought back tears while testifying Monday. He said he was "embarrassed" and "ashamed" when he found out allegations were leading to a demotion. But he defended himself throughout the ordeal by saying "horseplay" and "roughhousing" are a normal part of life at a Tucson firehouse, and he never intended to hurt or humiliate anyone.

During his hearing, numerous fellow firefighters' testimony confirmed Tamietti's description of firehouses. Firefighters from paramedics to battalion chiefs who were sworn under oath said roughhousing was part of the culture.

While Tamietti admitted to throwing Jenkins on the couch, he denied ever performing a lewd act.

The civil service commission cited the lack of even one corroborating witness to support Jenkins’ allegations, “dubious” investigative methods employed by those who investigated the allegations, and improper application of the department’s own rules in rendering their decision to restore Captain Tamietti’s rank.

Captain Tamietti still faces the three criminal charges.

More on the story.

Posted in Criminal Law, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Professional Standards, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Ohio Firefighter Files Discrimination Claim Over Nazi Salute

An Ohio firefighter who claims he was disciplined in retaliation for complaining about members giving a Nazi salute to the fire chief, has filed a formal complaint with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Firefighter Paul Way, a 28 year veteran of the Shawnee Township Fire Department, was terminated last December for abusing his sick leave. He was observed to have been drinking beer in a sports bar while off sick on September 12, 2012 and again on September 14, 2012.

The sick leave was taken just days after Way had been demoted from platoon chief to firefighter for what has been characterized by the department as his spreading negative information within the department via emails. He received a written warning about the emails in July of 2012.

Way’s attorney, Fazeel Khan, claims his client was wrongfully terminated over relatively minor disciplinary offenses in retaliation for his complaints about blatantly offensive and discriminatory conduct with the department. He claims that Fire Chief Todd Truesdale is routinely given a “Heil Hitler” salute by members of the department, and was once given a cake adorned with a Swastika. That cake included small figurines that were “marching into an oven”.

Way and his attorney have provided the EEOC with a number of photos of members giving Chief Truesdale the salute (exhibit A, exhibit B), as well as photos of the Swastika cake as proof of what he alleges is occurring. They claim the department discriminates against religious minorities, homosexuals and women.

According to attorney Khan “We believe Mr. Way was targeted, harassed and treated unjustly simply for his opposition to discriminatory practices and a general culture of bigotry rampant at the Fire Department.”

However, platoon Chief John Norris provided an entirely different version of events to reporters from Channel 4 in Columbus earlier this month. Chief Norris claims that  Way was the one who started Nazi salute for Chief Truesdle. Quoting from a transcript of the Channel 4 interview:

Norris: "Mr. Way started this over 10 years ago as a joke against his shift officer, who is now the chief of the department."

Norris also claims that it was Paul Way who instigated the "Heil Hitler" salutes

As for this cake, which is now part of the EEOC complaint, Norris says it is 10 years old. He admits it was made for Todd Truesdale, before he was chief, and claims Paul Way was instrumental in acquiring it.

Norris: "Everybody knew he was not happy at all with that. And chief has told me that right after that, he talked to Mr. Way in regards to that being inappropriate and that was to never happen again."

Way denies Chief Norris’s claims. The EEOC filing is a necessary predicate to filing a discrimination claim in court.

More on the story.

Posted in Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Wrongful termination, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

West Virginia Chief Facing Sexual Harassment Allegations

A very strange sexual harassment suit brought by the wife of a career firefighter in Grafton, West Virginia accuses the city’s fire chief of numerous sexual improprieties. And that’s not even the strange part!

Lynsey Mumaw, wife of firefighter Shane Mumaw, accuses Grafton Fire Chief John Casey Jones of numerous sexually inappropriate actions. Mumaw herself was a volunteer firefighter for the Grafton Volunteer Fire Department until she was dismissed by Chief Jones on June 12, 2012.

Among the allegations that she has made against Chief Jones are that he:

  • Routinely referred to himself as the “F%$^ing Boss of the Fire Department”  or “FB of the FD” for short;
  • Commented “that he liked to feel [Mumaw’s] breasts against him” after giving her a hug (he is alleged to have regularly given her hugs);
  • When ever Mumaw’s 17 year old daughter “indlcated she needed to leave to use the restroom, and Fire Chief John Casey Jones was around, he would ask if she needed help”;
  • Told Mumaw’s husband “If your wife would just give it up to me, you may be lieutenant a little quicker”;
  • When Mumaw was considering getting baptized he told her: “girls like you don’t deserve to be baptized because then people like me can’t get in their pants”;
  • Told Mumaw “Always remember who signs your husband’s paycheck”;
  • In the presence of her daughter, Chief Jones “grabbed Lynsey Mumaw by her head and started bobbing her head up and down towards his genitals, as in a simulated act of fellatio”;

The suit also alleges the city failed to properly investigate Mumaw’s allegations when they were originally disclosed.

The complaint was filed in state court last February. At the city’s request, the case was removed to federal court in March. It is back in the news again because earlier this month the US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia remanded it back to state court following a finding that no federal issues were implicated.

If all of this is perhaps a little bit much process, you may want to sit down before reading further. According to the complaint Mumaw is a paraplegic, paralyzed from the waist down. YCMTSU.

The 20 page complaint explains the allegations in nauseating detail. It contains eight counts, including sexual harassment, mental or emotional injury, intentional infliction of severe emotional distress, negligent infliction of severe emotional distress, negligent failure to investigate, religious harassment, battery, and hostile work environment sexual harassment. For the Legal Eagles out there… here's the shocker… an employment discrimination complaint filed on behalf of a plaintiff who is a paraplegic… that does not allege an ADA violation…. YCMTSU – Lawyers Edition.

Here is a copy of the complaint.  Complaint.pl

Posted in ADA, Civil Suit, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, Volunteers, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Fire Law Headlines in FDNY and Dallas

Its been a busy few days from the Fire Law perspective and I am trying to catch up with some of the major headlines from across the country.

The city of New York received a favorable ruling from the 2nd Circuit yesterday in the historic FDNY race discrimination lawsuit. The FDNY had been crucified for the past three years in Federal District Court by the trial judge, Nicholas Garaufis.

Judge Garaufis ruled that not only had the city committed unintentional discrimination (disparate impact… ie. statistical discrimination) in its selection process for FDNY, but that by continuing to use a selection process that showed a disparate impact over the course of decades the city committed intentional (disparate treatment) discrimination.

Based on the unintentional (disparate impact) discrimination, Judge Garaufis invalidated the use of tests that showed a disparate impact, and ordered the appointment of a Special Master to oversee the hiring process. Due to the intentional (disparate treatment) discrimination finding he ordered a more “robust” array of remedial actions, including racial preferences/hiring quotas, $128 million in damages to be paid to minority applicants who were not selected, and the creation of an oversight monitor for 10 years to ensure necessary changes were implemented.

The city did not appeal the disparate impact finding, but rather focused narrowly on Judge Garaufis’ disparate treatment finding. The city also alleged that the judge had lost his objectivity in the case.

The 2nd Circuit agreed with the city that the finding of intentional discrimination (disparate treatment) was improper, and sent that part of the case back for a trial on the merits. The court concluded Judge Garaufis had not lost his objectivity, but ruled he should not preside over the trial.

The court reversed all of Judge Garaufis’ remedies associated with the disparate treatment finding, although the court agreed the oversight monitor should remain in effect for five years.

Since the ruling both sides have been declaring victory. New York City Corporation Counsel Michael A. Cardozo released a statement saying: “We are extremely pleased that the Second Circuit recognized significant problems in the manner in which the District Court handled the case.”

An attorney for the plaintiffs, Dana Lossia, countered that “The court monitor will oversee the FDNY’s hiring practices until 2017. That type of order is only issued and affirmed if there is a true serious issue.”

Here is a copy of the ruling. US v City of New York

More on the story.

 

And briefly…. Dallas Fire-Rescue reached a settlement in the 2009 sexual harassment suit filed by Leanne Siri-Edwards. Siri-Edwards was the civilian executive who was brought in to help newly hire Fire Chief Eddie Burns manage the department.

The lawsuit claimed that “Pervasive, severe, outrageous and obscene acts of discrimination, hostility, disrespect and harassment by [Dallas Fire-Rescue] leaders have slowly dismantled [Siri-Edwards’] reputation and her spirit."

The settlement calls for Siri-Edwards to be paid $390,000.

More on the story.

For my homies… I will get to the North Kingstown ruling by weeks end.  I am still trying to digest the ruling… despite the sense of nausea I get reading it… I keep telling myself "we are a country of laws, not men"… but all too often we see judges who let their political ideology corrupt their reasoning… but I digress.

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Politics, Sexual Harassment

Tagged , , , , ,

Bizarre Tucson Sexual Harassment Claim Settled for $125k

A bizarre male-on-male sexual harassment claim made by a paramedic against a captain in the Tucson Fire Department has resulted in a $125,000 settlement.

Paramedic firefighter Cody Jenkins claims that he was physically assaulted and harassed three times by Captain Roger Tamietti on November 9, 2012 while working at Station 7.  The three incidents were:

  • At about 10:00am when Jenkins returned from a run, Tamietti tackled him knocking him onto a couch where he "forcibly humped and ground" against Jenkins while holding him on a couch.
  • Jenkins claims after the first incident, he felt dirty and violated so he took a shower.  He claims that while walking back to his room wrapped in a towel, Tamietti swatted him on his buttocks.
  • The third incident allegedly occurred when Jenkins was working on the computer in Captain Tamietti's office. Jenkins said Tamietti came up behind him and rubbed his groin against the back of Jenkins’ head. When Jenkins pulled his head away Tamietti allegedly pulled it back against his groin.

Jenkins filed a complaint against Captain Tamietti and an investigation was initiated. Tamietti claimed he was merely engaging in “horseplay”, denied committing any lewd acts, and said he was just trying to make Jenkins feel like one of the guys.

According to the Arizona Daily Star, the investigation concluded that:

  • “Homophobic and racial slurs [are] used frequently by TFD employees.
  • “Tamietti once jumped out of the shower naked and surprised a firefighter. He called the firefighter a "meat-gazer" for looking at him.
  • “Tamietti exposed himself to another firefighter for no apparent reason.
  • “Tamietti and two other firefighters did a gyrating dance in their underwear two to three inches from a firefighter who was making a salad dressing for dinner.
  • “Butt-slapping was common.”

Tamietti was demoted to firefighter for acting “inappropriately”.  He is appealing the demotion claiming the penalty is “excessive” and based on exaggerations by Jenkins. He has also been charged criminally with three misdemeanors alleging assault and harassment.

Last February, Jenkins filed a $500,000 civil claim with the city, alleging he "sustained serious and ongoing psychological damages and injuries" and "sustained a loss of earnings and is psychologically unable to go back to work due to his fear of further retaliation."

The claim also alleges Jenkins was bullied and harassed several years ago at Station 7 while on probation. Jenkins claims he was duct-taped to a pole, intentionally tripped by other firemen, and subjected to verbal abuse.

While normally a civil claim is merely a procedural formality necessary before someone can file a lawsuit against a governmental entity, the Tucson city council took up the matter and agreed to compensate Jenkins $125,000

The Arizona Daily Star quoted Councilman Steve Kozachik as saying "These guys need to act like professionals and not adolescents. … It's not summer camp. That childish behavior is costing taxpayers $125,000."

More on the story.

 

Posted in Civil Suit, Criminal Law, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Jury Awards Two Camden Firefighters $596k for Discrimination

Two Hispanic firefighters from Camden have been awarded $596,000 by a New Jersey jury for discrimination.

Firefighters Andres Nieves, 48, and Samuel Munoz, 34, claim they were subjected to a hostile work environment and they were unfairly passed over for promotion to captain in 2009 because they are Hispanic.

Back in 2009 Nieves and Munoz were next up on the promotion list when it expired. There were vacancies at the time but the promotions were not made until a new list was established.

Among the other allegations according to Philly.com, Munoz claims at fires he was unfairly required to spend too much time on the nozzle without a break. [Did I really say that with a straight face…]

Last Thursday, a state court jury awarded Nieves $390,000 in damages and Munoz's $206,000. The awards were intended to compensate the firefighters for lost wages, compensation for retaliation, and damages for having to work in a hostile environment.

More on the story.

 

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Politics, Promotions

Tagged , , , , ,

Texas Firefighter Sues For Comp Disability

A Texas firefighter who was terminated while recuperating from a back injury has filed suit seeking $1 million in damages.

University Park Fire Department Paramedic Brad Tucker, 31, was injured on October 20, 2011 while lifting a patient. He had been on workers compensation recuperating until February 2012 when the City of University Park stopped both his compensation and medical coverage.

According to the lawsuit, the city acted “unilaterally and without any legitimate basis”. The city is self-insured for comp purposes.

Tucker retained an attorney who appealed the decision to the Texas Board of Insurance, Workers Compensation Division.  The Workers Comp Division ordered the city to reinstate both Tucker’s compensation and health benefits.

Thereafter Tucker was ordered to report to fire department headquarters, where he was told he had to either report for full duty by November 2, 2012, or face termination. Unable to return to full duty he was terminated on November 2, 2012.

Tucker promptly filed a claim of disability discrimination with the EOOC and the Texas Workforce Commission, who issued a right to sue letter in April. His lawsuit was filed last week alleging disability discrimination under federal and state law, wrongful termination, and retaliation.

Here is a copy of the complaint. Brad-Tucker-v-University-Park


 

Posted in ADA, Civil Suit, Discrimination, EMS, Municipal Liability, Workers Compensation

Tagged , , ,

Chicago Settles Sex Discrimination Suit Over Abilities Test

 

A settlement has been announced in the 2011 gender discrimination case involving the Chicago Fire Department.

The suit, Vasich v. City of Chicago, alleged that the department’s physical abilities test unlawfully discriminated against women because it had a disparate impact on women candidates and was not sufficiently job related.

The lead plaintiff, Samantha Vasich, claims she rigorously prepared for the test, including hiring a personal trainer to assist her, to no avail. The class action suit was filed in federal court.

Attorney Marni Willenson, who represents the plaintiffs, said that under the settlement 138 women who previously failed the physical abilities test will be allowed to reapply or receive a portion of a $2 million payment.

As part of the settlement the city has agreed to adopt the Candidate Physical Ability Test (CPAT), developed by the IAFF.

Despite the fact that the settlement still must be approved by the city council and the judge, the women have been informed that may reapply beginning Monday, May 6, 2013

It is unclear from the news reports whether this settlement will resolve the 2012 suit Godfrey vs. City of Chicago. That suit was brought by twenty African-American female firefighters who where granted a preference under the Lewis v. City of Chicago (race discrimination) settlement, but failed the physical abilities test. All twenty Godfrey plaintiffs are plaintiffs in the Vasich case.

More on the Vasich case.

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Negligence, Politics

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Arbitrator Overturns Demotion in Miami Dade Facebook Rant Case

 

Miami Dade’s Brian Beckmann is once again a captain, courtesy of a long awaited arbitrators ruling handed down today.

Just about a year ago, the case made news when Captain Beckmann posted some remarks about the Trayvon Martin shooting case that many took to be racist. The remarks themselves did not reference race but in the context of the thread were understood by some to be offensive. For the record those remarks were:

"I and my co-workers could rewrite the book on whether our urban youths are victims of racist profiling or products of their failed, (expletive), ignorant, pathetic, welfare dependent excuses for parents."

While the remarks were initially shared with a limited number of his Facebook friends, an “offended” co-worker of Captain Beckmann’s forwarded the post to others causing the statement to go viral.

Riding a wave of public anger over the posting, Miami Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez directed Fire Chief William W. Bryson to terminate Captain Beckmann.  Chief Bryson felt a 14 day suspension was more in order but relented to the demotion when he realized his own job was on the line.

The arbitrator’s ruling issued today reversed the demotion and imposed a 14 day suspension concluding that the Mayor exceeded his authority in dictating the punishment which by law was delegated to the Fire Chief.

The Mayor made the decision to demote Mr. Beckmann, and Chief Bryson carried out the Mayor’s decision by signing the demotion letter. Chief Bryson did so only because he believed that he had no discretion to do otherwise. …

The Arbitrator deems it self-evident that the [city’s personnel] directives – that [dictate that] the demotion decision must be made by a Department Director – refers to who must make the decision and not to who must sign the paperwork. The latter without the former would be an empty clerical gesture, unworthy of memorialization in the CBA. …

Under CBA Article 4.8, Chief Bryson alone was to have made the decision to demote…

[T]he Arbitrator finds that Chief Bryson believed that if he did not fire or demote Captain Beckmann, he would be discharged. That constraint upon Chief Bryson’s independent judgment constituted a violation of the parties’ CBA contractual intent….

In reinstating Captain Beckmann the arbitrator also awarded him back pay for the nearly eleven months he was paid at firefighter’s rate.

Here is a copy of the ruling: Arbitrator's Decision – Beckmann Facebook Posting Demotion

I have to admit, I am somewhat disappointed that the case focused solely on the role of the mayor in overreaching the fire chief, and not on what is a more important issue: the First Amendment rights of an off duty firefighter to discuss a non-work related matter of public concern as a private citizen.

Perhaps that will have to await a civil suit.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Posted in Constitutional Rights, cyber-casualty, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, First Amendment, Labor Law, Politics, Social Media, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , ,

Illinois Sexual Harassment Suit Removed to Federal Court

 

An Illinois sexual harassment case originally filed in state court, is now headed to federal court along with some nasty allegations.

Lieutenant Terri Simone Lorenz of the Orland Fire Protection District claims that her sexual harassment problems began shortly after Fire Chief Bryant Krizik and Deputy Chief Joe Madden were placed on administrative leave in May, 2011. She alleges that the newly appointed acting fire chief, Raymond Kay, and Battalion Chief Nicholas Cinquepalmi embarked on a malicious campaign to drive her from the department.

Quoting from the complaint:

Defendants subjected Simone Lorenz to a long standing pattern of discrimination based on her sex (female), retaliation because she complained, and created and perpetuated a hostile work environment, including but not limited to the following:

a.Maintaining pornographic, sexually graphic, and other inappropriate material in the women’s bathroom and in other places in the fire house;

b.Making derogatory comments about women, including about Simone Lorenz, other women firefighters, and other women generally;

c.Singling Simone Lorenz out on drills;

d.Shunning and ostracizing Simone Lorenz and encouraging other firefighters to do the same, which for a firefighter can be a safety issue on fire calls, which are inherently dangerous;

e.Spreading malicious and sexually based rumors about Simone Lorenz;

f.Subjecting Simone Lorenz to unwarranted scrutiny, criticism, and false allegations;

g.Subjecting Simone Lorenz to a notice of interrogation based on false and malicious accusations and without cause, when other employees were not subject to interrogation for similar or more egregious allegations against them;

h.Subjecting Simone Lorenz to unwarranted disciplinary action, and discipline for which male employees were not subjected to for far more egregious allegations made against the male employees; and

i.Denying Simone Lorenz assignments and special projects that she had previously done.

The six-count, 46 page complaint includes some 199 paragraphs, alleging gender discrimination under state and federal law, hostile work environment, retaliation under the Illinois Human Rights Act, discrimination on the basis of union affiliation, and Constitutional violations (42 USC 1983) of the Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment.

Included in the specifics of the claims:

  • Chief Kay initiated an unwarranted investigation into whether Simone Lorenz cheated on her promotional exam even though she was promoted in 2009, two years before he became the acting chief. The investigation did not result in charges and Simone Lorenz insists the allegations were fabricated.
  • Simone Lorenz received a one day suspension for “giving the finger” to another lieutenant while both were off duty at a union function. The charge was later reversed by an arbitrator who heard testimony that included:
  • [Chief Kay] admitted that he had never recommended or issued discipline for that kind of conduct – except for against Simone Lorenz.
  • Defendant [BC] Cinquepalmi gave “the finger” to Simone Lorenz’s entire crew during roll call, and was never disciplined
  • Defendant [BC] Cinquepalmi instructed [the other lieutenant] to document the incident, so that Defendants could then charge Simone Lorenz with misconduct and discipline, demote her, or fire her from the District
  • Management  admitted that  giving “the finger” to one another commonly occurs “on duty” in the firehouse
  • Simone Lorenz was suspended for 1 day for sending an email to “all users” (subsequently reversed by an arbitrator after it was revealed there was no rule that prohibited it and that others who did the same thing were not disciplined).
  • Repeated requests for help from human resources went largely ignored.

The case was originally filed in Cook County Circuit Court, and was removed to federal court at the request of the Fire Protection District.

Here is a copy of the complaint. Complaint

While there are a number of troubling aspects to the allegations in the compliant, there is one issue that stands out to me that is worth discussing from a leadership perspective: Lt. Simone Lorenz made repeated allegations that male subordinates were rude and disrespectful towards her, and that Chief Kay and Cinquepalmi did nothing to address the insubordination when told.

Who bears the responsibility for this, Lt. Simone Lorenz or the chiefs? Is it enough for a lieutenant in this situation to claim that “they” know about it?

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, First Amendment, Municipal Liability, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , ,

Washington Firefighters Victorious In Retaliation Suit

Seven firefighters from Pullman, Washington have been awarded $1 million in damages in a mind-boggling case worthy of a novel, if not a movie. The case included allegations of a workplace affair, vindictive retaliation, sexual harassment, an officer asking subordinates to provide naked photos of their wives, and counter allegations of a vengeful witch hunt by city officials against union officials.

The lawsuit was brought by Captain Eric Reiber, president of Pullman Firefighters IAFF Local 1892, and six other members who claim they were wrongly disciplined for standing up for Captain Reiber. The suit alleges due process violations, First Amendment violations, conspiracy, defamation, false light privacy violations, intentional infliction of severe emotional distress (outrage), and a state law retaliation claim.

Captain Reiber alleges that one of his subordinates, a female, was having an affair with a married firefighter and that the relationship was creating turmoil in the workplace. When he reported the affair, the pair fabricated allegations of misconduct by Captain Reiber. The fire chief and the city allegedly seized on the allegations as an opportunity to weaken the union’s bargaining position and retaliate against Captain Reiber for his past union activities.

The 28 page complaint can be downloaded here – in two parts. It is a very interesting read.

Part I  Reiber v Pullman -1.pl

Part 2  Reiber v Pullman -2.pl

Between the allegations and counter allegations, we will never know where the truth lies. However, the case points out the importance of conducting a thorough and impartial investigation when firefighters are accused of misconduct.

Among the mistakes made by the Pullman Fire Department in investigating the allegations and imposing discipline – at least according to the complaint:

  • The fire chief instructed a member to prepare a written statement implicating Captain Reiber. When it did not provide “sufficiently negative” information, the chief directed the member to redo the statement incorporating negative comments the chief supplied.
  • The fire chief and the city’s investigator developed a list of “highly inflammatory and suggestive” questions that were given to a large number of employees about the Captain Reiber “making sexual comments and leering overtures to women”. The questions together with his suspension created the impression “that City officials already held evidence of serious wrongdoing”. One question in particular "Have you or anyone you know ever been requested to provide Captain Eric Reiber with sexually suggestive photos?" allegedly defamed Captain Reiber. The questioning of the employees coincided with contentious contract negotiations.
  • When Captain Reiber’s accusers made their claims the investigators did not require them “to provide any specifics as to what was said, or when” and the city “exercised no diligence whatsoever in ascertaining the context or assessing the truthfulness of these charges. Their failure to properly investigate was willful and malicious.’
  • At Captain Reiber’s disciplinary hearing on the original charges the city “refused to allow testimony from the many Local 1892 members present and announced that they would accept only written submissions in support of Reiber.”
  • Following the hearing the city sent the union a letter threatening “members with discipline should they question the allegations” by submitting written statements in support of Captain Reiber’s version of the events.
  • During the grievance arbitration that followed Captain Reiber’s demotion and discipline it was disclosed that the city “willfully withheld … a document seminal to the investigation …. The City's willful concealment of evidence constitute[d a] deprivation of Reiber's due process rights”
  • After disciplining Captain Reiber for his original alleged misconduct, the city then took disciplinary action against him and six firefighters who submitted written statements on his behalf alleging that Captain Reiber’s defense – which contradicted the allegations of his accusers – constituted unlawful retaliation against the accusers.

The six day jury trial in US District Court ended with a verdict in favor of Captain Reiber for $325,800 and $135,000 each to Rudy Fisher, Christopher Volk, John Gollnick, Jason Wilkins and Christopher Wehrung. The jury delivered the verdict on April 2, 2013.

The city of Pullman and the estate of Fire Chief Pat Wilkins were held liable. Chief Wilkins passed away last year while the case was pending. Other city officials, including the city’s HR director who served as the primary investigator, were not held personally liable.

For those who have been through the Fire Department Administrative Investigations and Enforcing Discipline Program, this case is certainly one to study for your ongoing professional development. Many of the best practices we discuss in class were not followed and the consequences are evident in the verdict.

More on the story.

 

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, First Amendment, Labor Law, Municipal Liability, Politics, Professional Standards, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, Uncategorized, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Montana Chief Sues for Wrongful Discharge

A former assistant chief in Montana has filed suit claiming he was wrongfully terminated in part because he cooperated with an investigation that led to the arrest and conviction of his former boss.

Assistant Chief Brian Crandell of the Central Valley Fire District was terminated on February 12, 2013 following two months of efforts by district officials said to be friends of former fire chief Brett M. Waters to force him to resign.

According to the complaint:

In the summer of 2010, the former Fire Chief of the Central Valley Fire District, Brett M. Waters, was investigated for theft of thousands of dollars from CVFD and official misconduct by the Montana Department of Justice Division of Criminal Investigation.

Plaintiff, along with at least two other employees of CVFD, reported pubIic policy violations and crimes by Waters to State investigators, and cooperated with the investigation of Waters. Waters later resigned from his position as Fire Chief with CVFD. Waters was charged with felony theft and official misconduct and ultimately pleaded guilty to official misconduct. He admitted that he had taken nearly $50,000 and agreed to pay it back.

During his tenure, Waters selected people to apply for appointment or run for election to the Board of Trustees for CVFD. Many of them continue a friendship with Waters. Mike Wachter, Gil Moore, and Ken Walker are members of the Board of Trustees whom Waters selected.

During the period of the investigation of Waters' criminal activity in 2010, CYFD Trustee Walker referred to the concerns raised about Waters' theft as “BS," and Trustee Moore referred to Plaintiff and other employees who reported the crimes as "chaff' at Board meetings.

In December, 2012, Fire Chief Ron Lindroth and Fire District board chairman Mike Wachter met with Chief Crandell to seek his resignation.

Wachter began this meeting by stating, "we are brother firefighters, and friends and instructors, and this is really hard." Wachter stated that Lindroth recommended "downsizing" and "eliminating [Crandell’s] position" and "it's the consensus of the Board to follow the Chiefs recommendations."

Lindroth then presented Plaintiff with a "severance agreement" which included a provision that he would give up his rights to sue for full legal redress. The agreement did not provide for anything but payment of wages and benefits he had already earned. Lindroth called it a "safety net" and told Plaintiff he should "find some other employment."

Lindroth told Plaintiff he wanted the agreement signed before the December Board meeting, and said that the "consideration" in the agreement would be better for Plaintiff jf he signed before the meeting. Plaintiff did not sign.

On December 13, 2012, Lindroth held a staff meeting and described his proposed "reorganization." The reorganization included eliminating Plaintiffs position and adding new positions, including company officer positions. Plaintiff is qualified to do company officer work. CVFD never offered him such a position.

On February 12, 2013, the CVFD held its monthly Board meeting. Plaintiff was in attendance, as he always was. Without notice to Plaintiff for to the public, as required bylaw, and without closing the meeting to protect his privacy, the Board voted to fire Plaintiff. Wachter publicly handed Plaintiff another unsigned "Severance Agreement." After the meeting, Wachter approached Plaintiff, took the "agreement" back and signed it. Plaintiff has never signed it, and never negotiated for it.

The complaint characterizes the reorganization plan as a pretext for Chief Crandell’s termination, and alleges that the fire district acted with actual malice in violating Montana's Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act. The complaint also alleges that Chief Crandell was wrongfully denied overtime compensation

Besides the two counts mentioned above, it would also appear that Chief Crandell’s legal team have at least three additional charges teed up and ready to drive if they need them, including:

  1. Whistleblower retaliation
  2. Due process violation (lack of notice and opportunity to be heard)
  3. Open meetings violation (lack of notice)

I am thinking they won’t need them!

Here is a copy of the complaint.  Crandell v Central Valley

Posted in Civil Suit, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Open Meetings Laws, Politics, Wrongful termination

Tagged , , ,

First Amendment and the Press’s Right to Take Photos

 

I received a question that was posted as a comment to one of the stories on firefighters interfering with the public’s right to cover news worthy events. I have paraphrased what was asked… and turned it into today’s burning question:

Is safety a legitimate reason to exclude the press from parts of an emergency scene? Excluding the public, yes, but I don't think safety should be grounds for excluding the press. According to all of the PIO classes I have attended safety cannot be used as a reason to exclude press. PIO's are being told that the only exclusions allowed for the press (leaving out the question of "who is the press") are (1) private property (trespass), (2) interference (reasonable work zone) and (3) exclusion from a crime scene.

Not that I don’t believe you, but is there a statutory provision or case law that you are using when you tell us we can exclude the press because of safety concerns?

Answer: It sounds to me like members of the press may have been involved in teaching your PIO classes, which is entirely understandable. They have an invaluable perspective to share with the fire service – and we need to listen. However, along with that perspective comes a certain bias in favor of the media that the law does not share.

So let me get this straight: according to these “instructors” we cannot deny the press access to a location based on safety concerns? Seriously? That means I could be advancing a hose line into a structure and have a news camera team along side of me? I cannot order them to stay outside? Or entering a hazmat hotzone in level A we might find a cameraman sauntering in? And we’d have to rely on the crime scene or work zone exclusion? I’m not even sure we can enforce the trespass exclusion – that is up to the property owner.  What if the property owner gives the news team permission to trespass?  Seriously? Your instructors told you we cannot stop the press over safety concerns?

Let’s assume your “instructors” are correct (they are not but play along). The Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear – the right to film and cover the news is not limited to the media – it extends to everyone … EVERYONE… so if we have to allow the media to go somewhere that is unsafe… then the public has the same right…  an 18 year old with an iPhone camera has the exact same rights to cover the news as a fully credentialed NBC news team.

OK… enough of the fun stuff… let’s get to the law. The issue is really cut and dried. We can establish and enforce a safety zone for both the public and the press. In Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972) the US Supreme Court said “the First Amendment does not guarantee the press a constitutional right of special access to information not available to the public generally.” In other words, the press’s right of access is no greater that the public’s right of access.  That means if we can deny the public access to a certain area out of concern for the public safety, we can deny it to the press as well.

If you are following this discussion… you will notice another interesting question is raised: if we give the press access to a scene (think the TV show COPS), then can any 18 year old with an iPhone demand the same access??? …. The answer to that is going to have to wait til next time.

Posted in Burning Question, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, First Amendment, Occupational Safety & Health, Politics, Social Media

Tagged , , , , ,

Phoenix Deputy Chief Claims Harassment and Retaliation

A deputy chief from Phoenix, Arizona has filed a rather unusual sexual harassment suit against the department: he claims that he was harassed by members and retaliated against by the department because he reprimanded officers who allowed sexually inappropriate drawings and items to be displayed in a fire station.

The case began in November, 2009, when Deputy Chief Frank Cheatham observed “several inappropriate, sexually suggestive drawings and items—specifically, two depictions of a penis and testicles—openly displayed in the workplace at Fire Station 1.” At the time Chief Cheatham was the South Side Shift commander, in charge of roughly 440 firefighters. He “admonished the supervisors at Fire Station 1 that such drawings were inappropriate and would not be tolerated in the future.”

Thereafter, Chief Cheatham was informed he was no longer welcome at meals at the station, and that “the firefighters at Fire Station 1 would never trust Chief Cheatham’s assistant again and considered him to be a spy for Chief Cheatham.”

Chief Cheatham claims that he then subjected to harassment, including:

  • “a t-shirt bearing another drawing of a penis and testicles [being] draped over a piece of gym equipment” where he was working out;
  • “a large brown envelope in interoffice mail containing two small pieces of pasta, one of which resembled a penis and the other of which resembled a vagina. … The piece of pasta resembling a vagina had Chief Cheatham’s first name (“Frank”) written on it.”
  • “rumors … that he would be removed from his position as Deputy Chief Shift Commander of South Shift Command.”

In March, 2010 Chief Cheatham was involuntarily transferred to the safety division, an assignment that he referred to as having “less favorable working hours … than the hours that he enjoyed in his position as Deputy Fire Chief Shift Commander of South Shift Command… and far less prestige…”

The complaint characterizes the transfer as retaliation, and demotion. It claims ‘The City of Phoenix Fire Department is engaging in a pattern and practice of retaliating against its employees who complain of discrimination in the workplace…. [and that the] harassment and retaliation summarized above had a substantial negative impact on Chief Cheatham's employment and psychological wellbeing and continue to do so.”

Here is a copy of the suit, filed last week in US District Court in Phoenix. Cheatham v Phoenix

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

EEOC Settles Another NY LOSAP Age Discrimination Suit

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has announced the settlement of yet another age-discrimination lawsuit against volunteer fire departments in New York involving their length of service award programs (LOSAP).

The suit was brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), against The Village of North Syracuse, the Town of Cicero and the Town of Clay, as well as the North Syracuse Fire Department, the Cicero Fire Department, the Clay Volunteer Fire Department, the Moyers Corner Fire Department, and the Cicero Fire District.

The defendants have agreed to pay an undisclosed amount to their firefighters who lost pension benefits, including several who will receive increased future monthly pension amounts.

The suit is similar to at least ten others (by my count) filed by the EEOC since 2006 alleging that the LOSAP programs violate the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) because they prohibit active members over a certain age from continuing to accrue LOSAP pension benefits.

Here is the full text of the EEOC press release:

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                          CONTACT:

April 2, 2013                                                                          

Michael J. O'Brien, Senior Trial Attorney  212-336-3694

Bryan D. White, Program Analyst    347-213-8821 

TTY: (212) 336-3622

 

VILLAGE OF NORTH SYRACUSE AND TOWNS OF CICERO AND CLAY SETTLE EEOC AGE DISCRIMINATION SUIT

Older Volunteer Firefighters Denied Service Credit Due to Ageism, Federal Agency Charged

            NEW YORK – The Village of North Syracuse, the Town of Cicero and the Town of Clay have agreed to settle a class age discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.  Those localities, as well as the North Syracuse Fire Department, the Cicero Fire Department, the Clay Volunteer Fire Depart­ment, the Moyers Corner Fire Department, and the Cicero Fire District, will pay a group of firefighters lost pension benefits as well as provide several firefighters increased future monthly pension amounts.

            The EEOC's suit had charged that from the early 1990s through the late 2000s, the eight defendants had refused to let volunteer firefighters accrue credit toward a "length of service award program" (LOSAP), the equivalent of a retirement pension, because of their age, either 60 or 62 depending on the fire department.  As a result, senior firefighters lost pension amounts, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), a federal law that protects workers age 40 and older from age discrimination.  Although North Syracuse, Cicero, and Clay had amended the LOSAPs to allow firefighters to earn credit without regard to age, the amend­ment did not provide for lost benefits.  The EEOC filed suit, No. 12-cv-1265, after first attempt­ing to reach a pre-litigation settlement.

            Under the terms of the agreement, North Syracuse, Clay, Cicero, and the Fire District have agreed to provide the EEOC with contact information for affected firefighters, and the EEOC will contact the firefighters to ascertain lost pension amounts.  U.S. Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks in Syracuse will oversee the process.

            "The brave men and women who volunteered to fight fires deserve to be treated equally, without regard to age," said EEOC Trial Attorney Michael J. O'Brien.  "We welcome the decision to settle this case in a way that ensures that these firefighters, who do heroic work, do not receive different retirement benefits simply because of their age."

Elizabeth Grossman, the EEOC's regional attorney in New York, added, "This case should remind all employers, including municipalities, that federal law prohibits targeting older workers for discriminatory treatment, including in relation to pensions or retirement benefits."

            The EEOC enforces federal laws banning workplace discrimination.  Further information about the agency is available at www.eeoc.gov

Posted in Civil Suit, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Politics, Volunteers

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

NYC Trial Over Treatment of Disabled During Emergencies Begins Today

 

A class action lawsuit filed by a disability rights group against the city of New York began today. The suit alleges that the needs and rights of the disabled are routinely violated during emergencies and disasters.

The suit was filed by Disability Rights Advocates in 2011 alleging that the city does not do enough to address the needs and safety of the disabled during disasters. Testimony is expected to focus on the city's alleged failure to properly locate and rescue disabled people during several recent weather related events, including Tropical Storm Irene and Super Storm Sandy.

Lawyers for Disability Rights Advocates say the group is not seeking monetary damages, but rather wants to see disaster planning do a better job of addressing disability related matters. The federal court trial is expected to take two weeks.

More on the story.

Posted in ADA, Civil Suit, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Politics

Tagged ,

Georgia Firefighter Settles Sexual Harassment Case for $350k

There has been a settlement in the case of a Peachtree City, Georgia firefighter who alleged that her fire chief had pressured her to have sex with him.

As we reported last December, Peachtree Fire Chief Edwin Eiswerth was accused of repeatedly propositioning Martine Piers. Within hours of the allegations becoming public, Chief Eiswerth announced his retirement effective January 1, 2013.

The settlement calls for Piers to receive $350,000, with $300,000 being paid by Georgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency (GIRMA), the city’s insurer, and $50,000 paid by the city.

In exchange, Piers has agreed to dismiss her complaint with the EEOC, and relinquish her right to file future lawsuits over the matter.

More on the story.

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Disciplinary Action, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Sexual Harassment, Sexual misconduct, You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Tagged , , ,

Ohio FD Tagged for $1.7 Million in Sex Discrimination Suit

 

An Ohio jury has awarded a former female firefighter $1.7 million for sex discrimination. They also ordered her Lieutenant to pay $75,000 for his role in the case.

Raechel Sterud, 32, alleged that Orange Township Fire Department and her officer, Lieutenant Keith Myers, discriminated against her leading to her termination in January, 2008. She was still on probation at the time.

Sterud claims that she complained to Lt. Meyers about being harassed, and that not only did he fail to address it, he maliciously recommended her termination prior to her completing probation and having union protection.

In the trial, a key piece of evidence was an email from a firefighter to Lt. Meyers that warned that Sterud planned to file a formal complaint once she had union protection. Sterud was terminated two weeks prior to her completion of probation.

There was also testimony that:

  • during sexual-harassment training, videos were shown on a split screen television so firefighters also could watch a NASCAR race;
  • one firefighter told other firefighters that he transferred to work with Sterud so he could sleep with her;
  • the same firefighter moved his sleeping quarters closer to Sterud’s and persisted in using the fire station’s womans’ bathroom.

The case was tried last week with the verdict being rendered this week.

More on the story.

Posted in Civil Suit, Constitutional Rights, Discrimination, Municipal Liability, Sexual Harassment

Tagged , ,