Last week, a federal district court in Connecticut held that the Department of Corrections violated federal law in instituting a discriminatory physical fitness test that created a disparate impact on women. It also found tha
t the test was not job-related or necessary.
In doing so, the court granted summary judgment to the employee
You’ve seen a lot on this blog about how the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) may have a significant impact on how employment discrimination cases proceed.
We haven’t had many cases yet to judge that on because the Act was not retroactive, but a case recently decided in Connecticut District Court gives us some insight into
In broad terms, the First Amendment prohibits public employers from retaliating against employees who engage in "protected speech". (Connecticut has a statute, Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec. 31-51q that purports to apply the First Amendment to private employers too.) But proving these cases remains difficult for employees.
And even victories may later end up as
A former Branford Facilities Manager’s claims that his employment was terminated due to protected speech and his political affiliation were effectively dismissed on Friday, February 25th when a federal court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment.
The 40-page opinion provides good roadmap for employers (and their attorneys) to understanding such claims and what is
While fans of the long running television reality show Survivor may suggest the timing of this post is geared to the events of last night’s episode that featured two players who quit, there are actually two recent and noteworthy cases in Connecticut that show that employees who quit their jobs rare win discrimination claims that
There is an unspoken truth about the Superior Courts in Connecticut: Summary judgment for employers in employment-related claims is typically a long shot. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule.
A case to be released by the Connecticut Appellate Court next week shows the difficulty but also shows that at least with regard to
In employment discrimination cases, some of the day-to-day details of a person’s employment are sometimes disputed. Did an employee "continually" cry at work or only "occasionally" cry? And does it matter?
A recent Connecticut district court decision clarified that such trivial disputes about an employee’s background — without more — are not enough to be
If you’re an employer with an appeal to the Second Circuit, having the EEOC write a brief on behalf of the Plaintiff-employee is not one of those things that portends well for the case.
So, when the Second Circuit issued its decision in Pucino v. Verizon Communications (download here), perhaps the writing was already on
Last year, I talked about a First Amendment retaliation case and noted the difficulties in defending against such claims. A new case out of the federal court in Connecticut last week highlights the those difficulties even further.
In Brown v. Waterbury Board of Ed. (download here), the Plaintiff, a custodian for the Waterbury
An employee who is passed over for promotion — time and again — may feel like the whole world is against them. 
Even so, the fact that supervisors and coworkers may "dislike" a particular employee is not enough to prove that the employer retaliated against the employee for participation in a discrimination claim.
So