Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Court sustains Human Rights? finding that the reasons advanced by employer for terminating employee was pretext for unlawful discrimination

Court sustains Human Rights? finding that the reasons advanced by employer for terminating employee was pretext for unlawful discrimination
New York State Office of Mental Health v New York State Division of Human Rights, 2010 NY Slip Op 06268, Decided on July 29, 2010, Appellate Division, Third Department

Bisi Asimolowo was employed by the Office of Mental Health as a pharmacy intern in 1992 and Asimolowo understood that he was expected to take and pass the licensing examination to become a pharmacist.

Although Asimolowo failed to become a licensed pharmacist, Mental Health periodically obtained authorization from the Department of Civil Service to continue employing him as a pharmacy intern.

The decision reports that in 2003 Asimolowo was unable to work for approximately 27 days due to undergoing treatment for cancer.

Asimolowo subsequently submitted a doctor's note stating that he was ?medically disabled due to an ankle and knee injury.? On that same day Mental Health notified him that his employment would end, ?ostensibly because the Department [of Civil Service] had declined to authorize his continued employment.?

Asimolowo filed a verified complaint with State Division of Human Rights alleging that among other things, disability discrimination. Ultimately a SDHR Administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order finding that although Mental Health had advanced an otherwise legitimate, nondiscrimatory reason for terminating Asimolowo's employment, it was, in fact, a pretext and Asimolowo had been discharged because of his disability.

The Commissioner of Human Rights adopted the ALJ's findings but reduced the proposed award of damages from $50,000 to $30,000.

Noting that ?A determination of SDHR is entitled to considerable deference due to its expertise in assessing discrimination claims, and we must uphold that determination if it is supported by substantial evidence,? the Appellate Division said that ?The parties do not dispute that Asimolowo suffered from a disability but was capable of working as a pharmacy intern or that [Mental Health] provided a legitimate, nondiscrimatory reason to support his termination.

Accordingly, said the court, it need only determine whether substantial evidence supports SDHR's finding that Asimolowo demonstrated that Mental Health's nondiscrimatory reason was, in fact, a pretext for unlawful discrimination.

Recognizing that Mental Health ?undoubtedly had legitimate concerns about Asimolowo's employment status given his failure to become a licensed pharmacist,? the Appellate Division said that ?serious efforts to remove him only began after he used a substantial quantity of sick leave to address medical issues.?

The court also commented that ?discussions of an unknown nature? occurred between Mental Health officials and the Department of Civil Service and that Asimolowo was not advised of his termination until after his supervisor was notified of his knee and ankle injury, ?despite [Mental Health?s] purported awareness of the pending termination for months beforehand.?

The court concluded that although the evidence in the record could support a different result, substantial evidence supported SDHR's determination that ?relying upon Asimolowo's dubious civil service status to terminate him was a pretext and that [Mental Health] intended, by the ?devious and subtle means? often employed, to discriminate.?

The Division's award of damages for Asimolowo's emotional distress was also affirmed. Such injuries, said the court, may be proven by a complainant's own testimony, even in the absence of medical or other treatment.

The Division had found that Asimolowo was continuing to feel "enormous mental anguish and humiliation" at the time of the hearing, over four years later, and that he was "deeply hurt" that his children had lost respect for him as a result of losing his job.

The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2010/2010_06268.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on July 30, 2010 (boomark / email).