Contact the experienced employment law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com
In the case of Eze v. State Department of Administrative Services, a Connecticut state employee filed suit against his employer, alleging race discrimination in the denial of a promotion in violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act, Conn. In addition, the employee sought to recover for loss of income and loss of seniority.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act, states that it is unlawful for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age. Under Connecticut law, the Fair Employment Practices Act prohibits discrimination in employment "because of" an individual's membership in a protected class, including race, color, religious creed, age, sex, marital status and national origin. To establish a claim for age discrimination, the Connecticut state employee must prove that: (1) he is in the protected class, as defined under Connecticut's Fair Employment Practices Act and the Federal Age Descrimination in Employment Act; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) that the adverse action occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. Once the state employee establishes such a case, the employer then must produce legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its adverse employment action.
The trial court held that the employee established a case of race discrimination by showing that he was a member of a protected class, that he was qualified for the position, and the he was not hired. The employer came forward with legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for selecting others for the position by showing that the employee did not perform well at his interview and that the employer followed the procedures employed by all stage agencies in evaluating the candidates. The employee failed to show that the employer's reasons for not promoting him were pretextual. Connecticut law allowed the employer to fill the vacancy by selecting any candidate on the candidate list. An MBA was not a requirement for the job, and although the employee scored 100 percent on the written examination, 10 percentage points were added for the MBA. There was no evidence of disparate treatment. Performance evaluations and in-service training were not considered in evaluating any of the candidates. None of the members of the interview panel included the employee the list of top four candidates. Finally, there was no evidence of racial animus.
If you feel you have been mistreated by your employer or in your place of employment and would like to explore your employment law options, contact the experienced employment law attorneys today at 203-221-3100, or by email at JMaya@mayalaw.com. We have the experience and knowledge you need at this critical juncture. We serve clients in both New York and Connecticut including New Canaan, Bridgeport, White Plains, and Darien.
For continuous access to the legal world, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn. We offer the latest updates on caselaw and legal news. In addition, informational videos are available for your convenience on our YouTube channel.
Source: Eze v. State Dep't of Admin. Servs., 2010 Conn. Super. LEXIS 147, 2010 WL 625824 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 15, 2010)
