SETTLEMENTS The Commission has the authority to assess fines and obtain cash settlements for those aggrieved by violations of the NYC Human Rights Law. Additional settlements and provisions successfully negotiated by the Commission might also include rehirings, policy changes, and modifications for accessibility. August 2012 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $30,591 for terminating Complainant’s employment while she was out on medical leave following a complicated pregnancy. Respondent was also ordered to reinstate Complainant, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $5,000 for making a discriminatory employment decision based upon Complainant’s age. Complainant retained her job, and Respondent employer was also ordered to undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. July 2012 Pursuant to Conciliation Agreements, the Commission ordered two separate employers to pay civil penalties of $2,500 each for posting discriminatory advertisements expressing a preference for women. Each employer will also undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent co-op board to provide Complainant, who has a mobility impairment, with a temporary parking spot as a reasonable accommodation, as well as move Complainant’s name to the top of the waiting list for a permanent spot. June 2012 As part of a settlement, the Commission ordered Respondent real estate broker to pay Complainant $10,000 in damages after one of its employees suggested he could help Complainant find an apartment if Complainant engaged in a sexual relationship with him. Respondent was also ordered to pay a civil penalty of $10,000. Respondent is no longer in business. May 2012 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $5,000 in emotional distress damages after a supervisor called Complainant by an offensive name regarding Complainant’s sexual orientation. Complainant was a seasonal employee near the end of her assignment. Respondent will also undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $10,000 in lost wages and emotional distress damages after Complainant was terminated by Respondent due to an old conviction, which was unrelated to his job. Complainant immediately found new employment. Respondent was also ordered to undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent housing provider to pay a civil penalty of $6,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement refusing to accept Section 8 or other voucher applicants, which was verified by a Commission tester. Respondent must also undergo anti-discrimination training. April 2012 The Commission ordered a Restaurant to pay a $10,000 fine to the city for placing a job advertisement that expressed a preference for women. This is the second time the same restaurant is being fined for similar behavior. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 and damages to Complainant in the amount of $20,000 for lost wages and emotional distress. Complainant was terminated after he informed a colleague, who was previously terminated, that the motivation for the termination was the colleague’s conviction record. All managerial employees at the company will undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent Coop Board to provide Complainant with a reasonable accommodation to its “No Pets” policy by allowing Complainant to keep his emotional support dog. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to reimburse Complainant $9,000, which represents rent payments made by Complainant after Respondent landlord refused to accept Complainant’s Section 8 voucher. Respondent landlord has since accepted Complainant’s Section 8 voucher. March 2012 In two similar cases, the Commission ordered Respondent restaurants to pay civil penalties of $5,000 and $2,500 for posting discriminatory advertisements expressing a preference for women and young people. Each is required to undergo anti-discrimination training. These were also Commission initiated; however, they were settled pre-trial. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $10,000 and damages to a complainant in the amount of $13,771 for lost wages and emotional distress. Complainant was terminated after a manager learned he had a conviction record. In a related case, to be settled shortly, the Complainant’s immediate supervisor was also terminated for revealing the real motivation for Complainant’s termination. All managerial employees at the company will undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $4,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The case was initiated through the Commission’s testing program. February 2012 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to provide Complainant with a stair lift to accommodate Complainant’s disability. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $7,500 for terminating Complainant’s employment after she complained of gender discrimination. Respondent immediately offered to give Complainant her job back, but she refused. The Commission ordered Respondent restaurant to pay Complainant $4,000 for prohibiting Complainant from entering the restaurant with her service animal. January 2012 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. This case resulted from the Commission’s testing efforts. As the result of the Commission’s testing program, the Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting employment to women, and making discriminatory hiring decisions based on gender. Respondent must also undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $22,500 for terminating Complainant’s employment after she complained of discrimination. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to revise its post disability return policy, which required employees to return without restrictions, a violation of the NYCHRL. Respondent must also pay a civil penalty of $10, 000 and undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to provide Complainant, a person with a disability, an accessible apartment, as well as make internal modifications to the apartment to accommodate Complainant’s disability. December 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to reinstate Complainant’s employment and pay her $21,556 in back pay after Complainant was terminated due to her association with a disabled child. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to revise its absence control policy, which previously allowed the employer to penalize employees for medically excused absences. The Commission ordered Respondent taxi cab driver to pay Complainant $3,500 for refusing to take Complainant to her destination due to her race. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting employment to women, and making discriminatory hiring decisions. The Respondent must also undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. After filing a complaint with the Commission alleging disability discrimination, Complainant privately settled the matter with Respondent employer for $17,500. November 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting employment to women; and making discriminatory hiring decisions. The Respondent must also undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. After filing a complaint with the Commission alleging religious discrimination, Complainant privately settled the matter with Respondent employer for $18,000. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $5,000 for failing to hire Complainant due to his disability. Respondent employer will also pay a civil penalty of $5,000 to the City. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $15,000 for failing to engage in the interactive process concerning Complainant’s disability; resulting in the termination of her employment. Respondent was also ordered to undergo anti-discrimination training. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $2,500 for posting a discriminatory advertisement expressing a preference for women, as well as undergo anti-discrimination training. October 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a $5,000 civil penalty to the City of New York for posting a discriminatory advertisement, limiting employment to women, which was confirmed by the Commission’s employment testing program. September 2011 The Commission successfully argued before OATH that Respondent Coop City discriminated against Complainant by not providing Complainant with a reasonable accommodation for Complainant’s disability by modifying its no pet policy and allowing Complainant to keep his/her therapeutic comfort animal. An Administrative Law Judge issued a Report and Recommendation awarding Complainant $50,000 in emotional distress damages and a civil penalty of $40,000 to the City. The Commission has not yet issued a final Decision and Order on the case. The Commission settled a case involving a sanitation supervisor who made racially insensitive comments to a subordinate employee. The employee complained to the Department of Sanitation and the supervisor was suspended and transferred. Thereafter, it is alleged that other supervisors retaliated by giving the employee unwarranted write-ups. The employee got $20,000 in damages. August 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $20,000 for failing to take corrective action after Complainant made a complaint of sexual harassment against her supervisor. Respondent employer must also provide training to its managerial staff regarding the NYC Human Rights Law and the prevention of discrimination. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $15,000 for failing to provide Complainant with a reasonable accommodation, which would have allowed Complainant to perform the essential functions of his job. Respondent employer also was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $10,000 and provide anti-discrimination training to its managerial staff. The Commission ordered Respondent bar to pay Complainants $4,500 and $5,000, respectively. Each Complainant was denied access to Respondent bar because of their mobility impairment. Respondent bar also was ordered to provide training to its staff regarding the NYC Human Rights Law. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $55,000 for retaliating against Complainant after she made a complaint of discrimination. The Commission ordered Respondent restaurant to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices, i.e., an advertisement expressing a preference for women, which the Commission confirmed pursuant to its testing program. The Commission ordered Respondent bed and breakfast, a housing accommodation, to pay a civil penalty of $4,900 for publishing a discriminatory advertisement refusing to lodge and accommodate families with children. Respondent was also ordered to change its policy in order to accommodate families with children. July 2011 After a hearing at OATH, Administrative Law Judge Alessandra F. Zorgniotti issued a Report and Recommendation finding Respondent, a place and/or provider of a public accommodation, liable for race base discrimination and recommending Complainant receive $7,500 in emotional distress damages and the City receive a civil penalty of $15,000. Pursuant to a conciliation agreement, the Commission ordered Respondent employer to reinstate Complainant to his former position, bridge his service as if he was never terminated, and pay Complainant $189,000, in back pay. The Commission ordered Respondent co-op board to allow Complainant to transfer his deceased partner’s shares to himself, as indicated in his partner’s will, and resume occupancy of the apartment. After a hearing at Oath, the Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $13,740 for wrongful termination, as well as a $5,000 fine to the City. June 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent restaurant to pay Complainant $4,000 for refusing to allow Complainant to enter the restaurant with her service animal. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting employment opportunities to women. The Commission ordered Respondent, a postsecondary academic institution, to compensate Complainant $45,000, for failing to accommodate Complainant’s disability. May 2011 After a hearing at OATH, the Commission ordered Respondent landlord to pay a civil penalty of $20,000 for refusing to accept Section 8 applicants as tenants. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to hire Complainant at an annual salary of approximately $70,000, after Respondent employer summarily rejected Complainant’s employment application due strictly to a prior criminal conviction. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to reimburse Complainant $18,249.04, for failure to accept Complainant’s Section 8 voucher in a timely fashion, as well as provide Complainant with a two year prospective rent abatement of $819.90 per month. April 2011 After trial, an ALJ employed by OATH issued a Report and Recommendation suggesting that the Commission order Respondent to pay Complainant $20,360 in compensatory damages, as well as impose a civil penalty of $15,000. The Respondent security company refused to allow Complainant to enter a building with his service animal and an employee of the company publicly ridiculed Complainant about his disability. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $7,500 for terminating Complainant’s employment due to her disability. March 2011 The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to reimburse Complainant $2,894 in rent payments for failure to accept Complainant’s Section 8 voucher in a timely fashion. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for summarily refusing to consider a Commission tester’s rental application after the tester indicated he was a Section 8 recipient. The Commission ordered Respondent
employer to pay Complainant $20,000 for terminating Complainant’s
employment solely because of a prior criminal conviction. Respondent
employer was also ordered to pay a civil penalty of $25,000. February 2011 The Commission settled allegations of discriminatory hiring practices, based on gender, against a Williamsburg restaurant for a $5,000 civil penalty to be paid to the City. The restaurant advertised, expressing a preference for females, and appeared to discriminate against the Commission's testers based on their gender. The Commission settled a lawful source of income discrimination case for approximately $10,000 representing the amount of rent the government would have paid had the landlord accepted and processed Complainant's application in a timely fashion. The Commission obtained a civil penalty in the amount of $2,250 from a hair salon that was charging different prices for men and women. All of the above settlements required training and policy changes. During this reporting period the Commission litigated a case against a security company that prevented a disabled individual from entering a building with his service animal. The Commission is awaiting the Administrative Law Judge's Report and Recommendation. During this reporting period the Commission issued a Decision and Order directing a landlord to pay a bi-racial lesbian couple $51,500 in damages. The Commission also Ordered a $20,000 civil penalty. January 2011 For failure to accept Complainant's Section 8 voucher in a timely fashion, prior to the termination of the NYCHA program in December 2009, the Commission ordered Respondent landlord to reimburse Complainant $9,000 in rent, as well as provide Complainant with a rent abatement of $600 per month for the next 24 months. The entire settlement is worth $23,400. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices, expressing a preference for women. The Commission ordered Respondent Coop Board,
the owners and managers of an HDFC building ("subject premises"),
to allow the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities to provide
access to the subject premises by installing a chair lift for
the benefit of Complainant, who is disabled by cerebral palsy.
The chair lift, as well as the work to be done on the subject
premises in preparation for installation, is valued at $134,905. December 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to pay Complainants, an unmarried couple, $10,000 for refusing to rent them an apartment due to their marital status. In addition, Respondent landlord will pay the City of New York a civil penalty of $5,000. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $40,000 in lost wages and emotional distress damages after Respondent employer failed to hire Complainant due to her religion and her inability to work on the Sabbath. November 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $30,000 in lost wages and emotional distress damages for terminating Complainant after she called in sick. The Commission also ordered Respondent employer to provide anti-discrimination training to its supervisory staff. October 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent restaurant to pay a civil penalty of $10,000 for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices based on gender. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $6,302.48 in emotional distress damages and back pay, as well as requiring an increase in her salary she would have received but for the illegal discipline resulting from her disability. The Commission ordered Respondent Taxi Cab driver to pay Complainant $2,000 for refusing to accept Complainant as a passenger because of his association with a person of color. The Commission ordered Respondent Beauty Salon, a provider of a public accommodation, to pay Complainant $7,500 for refusing her services because of her disability. Complainant is elderly and ambulates with the use of aids, i.e., a walker or wheel chair. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay Complainant $15,000 for terminating her employment because of her disability. The Commission ordered Respondent employer to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices. September 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to cease eviction proceedings against Complainant, who is disabled by a psychological impairment and requires a comfort animal to alleviate the symptoms of his illness. Respondent landlord will also pay Complainant $5,000 in emotional distress damages for failing to provide Complainant with a reasonable accommodation in a timely manner. After a settlement conference at OATH, Respondent landlord agreed to accept Complainant's Section 8 voucher and reimburse Complainant $6,363.00, which represents Complainant's portion of the rent he would not have had to pay if Respondent landlord had initially accepted his voucher months earlier. The Commission ordered two restaurants to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 each for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices by limiting employment to women. August 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to install three remote-control operated doors to allow Complaint, a wheel chair user, independent access to and from the building. The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to remove 18 year-old carpeting in Complainant's apartment, which exacerbates her respiratory ailments. Respondent agreed to install new vinyl flooring. July 2010 The Commission ordered Respondent landlord to move Complaint, who has trouble ambulating, to a ground floor apartment. The Commission obtained $5,000 in damages against Respondent dentist for refusing to provide services to Complainant, who is disabled and uses a motorized scooter to ambulate. After a pre-trial conference at OATH, Respondent landlord agreed to enter into a conciliation agreement whereby it would install a platform lift in the main lobby of the building in order to provide Complainant with independent access to the subject premises. June 2010 Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant $17,000 in lost wages and emotional distress damages after forcing her to take early maternity leave. Respondent employer also agreed to provide anti-discrimination training to its supervisory staff. After Complainant filed a case with the Commission, Respondent landlord agreed to accept Complaint's Section 8 housing voucher, as well as reimburse Complaint $3,170.75, the portion of Complainant's rent she would not have been obligated to pay if the landlord had initially accepted her Section 8 voucher. May 2010 Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant $30,000 for terminating her employment after she called in sick on the day she was scheduled to return to work following a surgical procedure, for which she was granted leave. Respondent landlord agreed to install a ramp at the main entrance to Complainant's building. Complainant ambulates by wheelchair. After filing a case with the Commission alleging race discrimination and retaliation, Complainant privately settled the matter with Respondents for $26,838. Respondent employer agreed
to pay Complainant $58,000 for withdrawing an offer of employment
strictly due to Complainant's arrest record. In addition, Respondent
employer will pay a civil penalty of $20,000 April 2010 After Complainant filed a case with the Commission alleging sexual harassment, Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant $20,000 for the inappropriate conduct of Complainant’s former supervisor, who had a longstanding personal relationship with Complainant. Respondent employer also terminated the offending supervisor. Due to the personal relationship between Complainant and her former supervisor, as well as the swift action taken by Respondent employer, the Commission does not believe it is necessary to pursue the matter further. Respondent landlord agreed to accept Complaint’s HPD Section 8 housing voucher, as well as reimburse Complaint the projected HPD portion of the rent from January 1, 2010 to the date HPD begins making Section 8 payments. After Complainant filed a disability discrimination complaint with the Commission, Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant, a seasonal employee, $6,613.00, which represents the remainder of Complainant’s salary for the period in question. After filing a complaint with the Commission
alleging religious discrimination and retaliatory discharge,
Complainant privately settled the matter with Respondent employer
for $375,000. March 2010 Pursuant to a Commission initiated complaint, Respondent employer agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting prospective applicants based on gender. Respondent landlord agreed to install an entrance/exit ramp to accommodate Complainant, a disabled tenant with mobility problems. Pursuant to a Commission initiated complaint that resulted from its housing discrimination testing, Respondent landlord agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for refusing to accept Section 8 recipients as tenants. The Commission obtained $1,000 in emotional distress
damages and a $5,000 civil penalty from an employer who summarily
refused to consider Complainant for employment due to a prior
conviction. The employer, who was not aware of what crime the
Complainant was convicted, had a blanket policy against employing
anyone with a conviction record. Ironically, had the employer
done the requisite analysis under Article 23 of the New York
State Correction Law, he would have been justified in denying
the Complainant the job (explaining the small amount of damages
to the Complainant). February 2010 Pursuant to a Commission conciliation agreement,
Respondent landlord agreed to give Complainant a one-year rent
credit based upon her discriminatory refusal of his Section 8
voucher. The settlement amount represents the money Complainant
over-paid from the point that he requested that the Respondent
accept his voucher to the point that the housing group ceased
funding the voucher. January 2010 Pursuant to a Commission conciliation agreement, Respondent landlord agreed to install a ramp to accommodate Complainant's disability and provide independent access. Two separate restaurants agreed to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 each for posting discriminatory advertisements based on gender, as well as discriminatory hiring practices that were confirmed by the Commission's employment testing program. Each restaurant also agreed to provide its staff with anti-discrimination training. Respondent employer agreed to compensate Complainant in the amount of $7,500 for the gender based discriminatory actions of her supervisor. After Respondent's internal investigation, the supervisor was disciplined and ordered to attend training. Pursuant to a Commission conciliation agreement, Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant $10,000 for their failure to engage her in the interactive process after she informed that she was pregnant and that the pregnancy was high-risk. Pursuant to a Commission intervention, Respondent
landlord agreed to accept Complainant's Section 8 voucher. The
housing group has since commenced payments under the voucher
program. December 2009 Pursuant to a Commission conciliation agreement, Respondent employer agreed to pay Complainant $2,000 for terminating her employment shortly after she gave notice that she was pregnant. Complainant did not intend to return to work after the birth of her child. The Commission, however, also fined Respondent employer $5,000 for violating the NYC Human Rights Law. Respondent employer also agreed to provide anti-discrimination employment training to its hiring and managerial staff. Pursuant to a Commission conciliation agreement,
Respondent employer agree to pay Complainant $5,000 for terminating
her employment shortly after she complained of discrimination.
Respondent employer also agreed to provide anti-discrimination
employment training to its hiring and managerial staff. November 2009 The Commission obtained $6,500 from Respondent food retailer for prohibiting Complainant, who is visually impaired, from entering Respondent's store with her guide dog. The Commission obtained $15,000 from Respondent
employer for disciplining Complainant each time she was out sick
to due a complicated pregnancy. Respondent employer also agreed
to train its staff regarding local, state, and federal anti-discrimination
laws. October 2009 After mediation, the Commission obtained $5,100 from Respondent nursing school program for canceling a Complainant's enrollment due to her disability. Complainant did not want to return to the program. Pursuant to the Commission's employment testing program, Respondent restaurant agreed to pay a civil penalty of $10,000 for posting a discriminatory advertisement limiting employment to women, which was confirmed through an employment test conducted by Commission employees. The Commission obtained $7,000 from Respondent
employer for failing to grant Complainant's request for a religious
observance, and subsequently terminating her employment after
one week of work. Complainant found new employment shortly thereafter
and refused to consider returning to Respondent employer. September 2009 The Commission obtained $48,000 from Respondent
employer for terminating Complainant's employment after learning
Complainant planned to file a sexual harassment discrimination
complaint. August 2009 Pursuant to a Commission settlement agreement, Respondent landlord will accept Complainant's Section 8 voucher as a lawful source of income and reimburse Complainant approximately $6,055.00, which represents the projected amount Complainant would not have had to pay if Respondent had accepted Complainant's Section 8 voucher when it was originally presented. Pursuant to a Commission settlement agreement, Respondent landlord will accept Complainant's Section 8 voucher as a lawful source of income and reimburse Complainant approximately $7,175.00, which represents the projected amount Complainant would not have had to pay if Respondent had accepted Complainant's Section 8 voucher when it was originally presented. The Commission obtained $5,000 on behalf of a
Complainant who alleged Respondent employer fostered a hostile
work environment based on gender. In addition, Respondent employer
agreed to provide training to its staff concerning local, state
and federal anti-discrimination laws. July 2009 Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent realty company, which posted a discriminatory advertisement stating "No Programs Accepted," Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent restaurant, which posted a discriminatory advertisement seeking "hostess and phone girl," Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $4,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent restaurant, which posted a discriminatory advertisement seeking "female hostesses," Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent restaurant, which posted a discriminatory advertisement seeking "Brazilian female bartender" and "Brazilian waitresses," Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. The Commission obtained $6,338.39 on behalf of
Complainant, who was summarily denied employment by Respondent
employer due to a prior criminal conviction. June 2009 Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent wine bar for posting a discriminatory advertisement seeking "Experienced Waitresses," Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent restaurant for posting a discriminatory advertisement based on gender, Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York, in addition to training its staff on federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. The Commission obtained $2,500, as a civil penalty, from Respondent real estate agency for posting the discriminatory advertisement, "No Government Programs." The Commission obtained $5,500 in damages from Respondent employer for summarily terminating Complainant's employment after learning of his conviction record. The Commission obtained $14,000 in damages from Respondent employers for terminating Complainant's employment after learning she was pregnant. The Commission obtained $10,000 in damages and
a $5,000 fine from Respondent physician for refusing to accommodate
Complainant, a hearing impaired patient, by providing a sign
language interpreter. May 2009 The Commission obtained $5,500 in emotional distress damages from Respondent employer for failing to engage Complainant, a pregnant woman, in the interactive process concerning a reasonable accommodation for her disability. Complainant and thirty others were ultimately laid off as part of a downsizing due to the economy. The Commission obtained $10,000 in civil penalties from two restaurants, $5,000 each, for posting discriminatory advertisements stating a limitation based on gender. Each restaurant also agreed to provide training to their staff regarding the prevention of discrimination against persons based on their membership in a protected class. The Commission obtained $5,000 in civil penalties from a restaurant for utilizing age based discriminatory hiring practices. The restaurant also agreed to provide training to its staff regarding the prevention of discrimination against persons based on their membership in a protected class. After a settlement conference at OATH, Respondent
storeowner agreed to pay Complainant, an autistic minor, $5,000
for expelling Complainant from the store due to his disability. April 2009 Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent realty, which posted a discriminatory advertisement proscribing Section 8 vouchers and other rental assistance programs, Respondent agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York. The Commission obtained $15,000 on behalf of a Complainant who alleged race base discrimination by his supervisor. Respondent company also provided the Commission with proof that the supervisor no longer works at the company and that its employees receive anti-discrimination training. The Commission obtained $27,000 on behalf of a Complainant who alleged age and disability discrimination after being terminated by Respondent while out on medical leave. The Commission obtained a $5,000 fine on behalf of the City against a Respondent housing provider for posting an illegal advertisement refusing to accept Section 8 vouchers. The Commission obtained $3,000 on behalf of a blind Complainant who was denied access, due to her service animal, to a retail store. Respondent store also agreed to provide training to its staff regarding public accommodation discrimination. Pursuant to a settlement conference held at OATH,
Respondent landlord agreed to accept Complainant's Section 8
voucher and reimburse Complainant $3,786.84, which represents
Complainant's portion of the rent she would not have had to pay
if Respondent landlord had initially accepted her Section 8 voucher
months earlier. March 2009 The Commission obtained $5,000 on behalf of a Complainant who was terminated by Respondent employer one day after she called the police to her workplace to complain of discrimination. The Commission obtained a total of $10,000 in
civil penalties from two restaurants, $5,000 each, for posting
discriminatory advertisements stating a limitation based on gender.
Each restaurant also agreed not to post discriminatory advertisements
in the future and not to engage in discriminatory hiring practices. February
2009 After filing a Commission initiated complaint against Respondent real estate agency for posting a discriminatory advertisement refusing to accept Section 8 vouchers, Respondent agreed to pay a $4,000 civil penalty to the City. The Commission obtained $13,000 on behalf of a Complainant who was terminated by Respondent employer days after complaining of discrimination. The Commission obtained $2,500 on behalf of a
Complainant who was refused an apartment after Respondent landlord
learned that Complainant was the recipient of a HIV/AIDS Service
Administration (HASA) voucher. In addition, Respondent will pay
$5,000 to the City as a civil penalty. Pursuant to negotiations between the Commission and Respondent landlord, Respondent agreed to construct an access ramp to accommodate Complainant, a wheelchair user. Respondent estimates the ramp will cost $35,000-40,000. The Commission obtained $37,500 on behalf of a Complainant who was terminated by Respondent employer after his FMLA leave expired. Respondent argued that it did not have to keep Complainant’s position open past his FMLA leave period, despite the fact that Complainant provided medical documentation seeking an extension. After filing a complaint with the Commission alleging religious discrimination, Complainant privately settled the matter with Respondent for $16,000. The Commission obtained $30,000 on behalf of a Complainant who was terminated by Respondent employer, an employment agency, due to his conviction record.
The Commission obtained $15,000 on behalf of a Complainant who was terminated by Respondent employer after being involved in a car accident. The settlement reflects lost wages and accrued vacation pay for approximately six months. Complainant, who is legally blind and uses the services of a guide dog to ambulate, was denied entrance into Respondent restaurant. After filing a case with the Commission alleging disability discrimination, Complainant, who is an attorney, privately settled the matter for $25,000 with Respondent restaurant. The Commission obtained $7,500 on behalf of a Complainant who alleged retaliatory termination after complaining of inappropriate race related language in the workplace. Respondent employer also agreed to establish policies and procedures to report discrimination, which will be posted throughout the workplace. This case was settled as the result of mediation, saving the expense of litigation. The Commission obtained $7,000 on behalf of a Complainant who alleged workplace discrimination due to his mental disability. Respondents terminated Complainant for cause; however, as part of the settlement they agreed to provide Complainant with a neutral letter of reference. After filing a case with the Commission alleging marital status discrimination, Complainant privately settled the matter for $4,000 with Respondent realty company.
As the result of a Commission initiated complaint, a restaurant that posted a discriminatory advertisement seeking “Female Hostess,” agreed to pay a fine of $4,000 to the City of New York. A complainant, who filed a complaint with the Commission alleging sexual harassment discrimination, privately settled the matter with her employer for $10,000. Based on the complainant’s request, the Commission closed its investigation.
After filing her case with the Commission alleging disability discrimination (pregnancy), Complainant requested that the Commission withdraw her complaint because she privately settled the matter with Respondent employer for $5,000. The Commission obtained $5,000 on behalf of a Complainant who was denied services at a nail salon because she has psoriasis, a non-contagious skin condition on her legs and arms, but not her hands. Respondent employees ridiculed and humiliated Complainant in front of other patrons. The Commission assisted a disabled Complainant against her landlord. Complainant wanted to move from her third floor apartment to a ground floor apartment. Respondent landlord ultimately allowed Complainant to swap her third floor rent stabilized apartment for a ground floor rent stabilized without any increase in rent. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation against Respondent restaurant, which posted the discriminatory advertisement "Hostess Positions Available," Respondent restaurant agreed to pay a fine of $5,000 to the City of New York.
The Commission obtained a $5,000 fine against an employer, as well as $380.00 in compensatory damages for the Complainant, for summarily discharging Complainant, a temporary employee, because of his conviction record. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation, the Commission obtained a $5,000 fine from Respondent landlord for placing a discriminatory advertisement on a web listing service, excluding children. The Commission filed a case on behalf of a Complainant who was allegedly not hired, by Respondent, due to his conviction record. Complainant withdrew the compliant after securing a $13,000 settlement from Respondent. The Commission successfully prosecuted an age discrimination case, at OATH, on behalf of a senior citizen who was summarily denied employment, by Respondent, due to her age and gender. After the trial, the Administrative Law Judge ordered Respondent to pay Complainant $640 in lost wages and a $1,000 fine to the City.
The Commission filed a case on behalf of a male who alleged that he was terminated due to a prior conviction. Complainant withdrew the compliant after securing a $20,000 settlement. The Commission obtained $11,000 on behalf of a disabled complainant who was denied access into a doctor's office located in a cooperative apartment building and was physically removed from the lobby by the building's doorman. The Commission successfully represented four disabled complainants against a respondent landlord, who agreed to construct multiple access ways into the subject building, as well as a covered waiting area.
The Commission successfully intervened on behalf of a complainant who was summarily denied employment because of her conviction record. A Commission attorney called the prospective employer who subsequently hired the woman at a salary of $63,000, plus $5,000 starting bonus. After an OATH settlement conference, the Commission obtained $8,800 on behalf of a complainant who alleged that he was denied employment because of a prior criminal conviction. Respondent company also agreed to pay the City a fine of $11,200 for violating the Human Rights Law. The Commission obtained $15,000 on behalf of complainant who was fired after complaining of discrimination. The Commission obtained $20,000 on behalf of another complainant who was refused employment solely because of the complainant’s criminal conviction record. Complainant received $8,800 in compensatory damages, and the City received a fine in the amount of $11,200. The Commission obtained $15,000 on behalf of a complainant who was terminated by respondent shortly after complaining of national origin discrimination.
The Commission obtained $6,000 on behalf of a complainant who was retaliated against after opposing discriminatory behavior at his place of employment. This case was settled through mediation avoiding the cost of litigation. Pursuant to a Commission initiated investigation, the Commission obtained $5,000 fine from a restaurant for placing a discriminatory advertisement on the web, which expressed a preference for a certain nationality.
The Commission obtained $15,500 on behalf of a male Complainant who alleged that his female boss, Respondent, sexually harassed him. In addition, the Respondent agreed to participate in a sexual harassment seminar, as well as provide her staff with training. The Commission obtained $7,000 ($3,500 apiece) on behalf of two female Hispanic Complainants who alleged race discrimination against their employer. The Commission obtained an $8,000 fine from Respondent restaurant for utilizing discriminatory hiring practices by refusing to consider male applicants for the “server” positions it posted on the web. The complaint was initiated as part of the Commission’s employment-testing program. The Commission settled a case involving ferry providers servicing New York City. Under the settlement agreement, Respondents will provide safe, secure and immediate means of embarking and disembarking on every trip for disabled passengers.
The Commission collected a $50,000 fine for the City and obtained $15,000 on behalf of an individual with a criminal record who was turned away from an employment agency. The Commission obtained $5,000 (approximately three months salary) on behalf of a former employee of a security company. Complainant, a security guard with Respondent Company, alleged that a male security personnel sexually harassed her. Complainant further alleged that after she complained to Respondent Company, she was retaliated against, in that her work hours were drastically reduced. The settlement was the by-product of the Commission’s mediation program.
The Commission obtained $4,500 on behalf of a former employee of an HVAC company. Complainant alleged that her supervisor sexual harassed her over a period of three months. Complainant further alleged that Respondent Company took corrective action after she complained about her supervisor’s coarse language. Complainant however prematurely quit her job immediately after complaining and without giving the company an opportunity to address the problem. Shortly after Complainant quit, Respondent Company fired the supervisor in question. The settlement was the by-product of a mediation conference held at the Commission’s Law Enforcement Bureau.
The Commission obtained $5,000 on behalf of a Complainant that was summarily denied employment opportunities with a security company because of his hair (dreadlocks associated with his creed, Rastafarian). An employee of Respondent informed complainant that their clients would not hire him because of his hair; therefore they would not hire him. The Commission obtained $5,000 on behalf of a Complainant that was fired after requesting an accommodation for her disability, a hearing impairment. Complainant was hired as a seasonal sales associate by a major retailer. During her employment, Respondent informed Complainant of some deficiencies regarding her performance. Complainant requested an accommodation for her disability, which appeared to have been the cause of Respondent’s concerns. Respondent denied the accommodation and terminated Complainant’s employment.
The Commission obtained $8,000 on behalf of a disabled employee of a store. The complainant was denied an accommodation for her disability (pregnancy) and was subsequently terminated for taking time off from work. In addition to the money, the store has agreed to train their staff regarding discrimination issues and has created a new employment discrimination policy. The complainant was offered her job back; however, she decided to stay home and raise her child. As a result of the Commission’s Employment Testing Program, the Commission was able to uncover discriminatory hiring practices at a Manhattan restaurant. The Commission’s Caucasian testers were directed to the restaurant’s manager to discuss employment opportunities, whereas the non-white testers (who entered minutes earlier or later) were told that the manager was not available and that they should leave their resume. The restaurant agreed to pay a $7,000 fine and provide all of its employees with employment discrimination training. The Commission obtained a $10,000 settlement on behalf of a 65 year-old, full-time student at local university who was denied housing due to his age. The settlement was the by-product of the Commission’s mediation program. The Commission obtained $8,000 on behalf of a former employee of City agency. Complainant was retaliated against after filing an internal EEO complainant against a Deputy Chief. Subsequent to the EEO complainant, Complainant received a poor performance evaluation. Complainant’s immediate Supervisor refused, at first, to endorse the poor performance evaluation. The settlement was the by-product of a mediation conference held at the urging of the Commission’s Law Enforcement Bureau.
The Commission received a favorable Report and Recommendation from an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) employed by the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings on a case litigated in June 2007. The case involved an employment agency that refused to consider placing the complainant due to her age (50). The ALJ recommended $1,000 in damages and a $5,000 fine to the City. The Commission will issue a Final Decision and Order after the parties have had an opportunity to comment on the recommendation. The Commission obtained $8,000 on behalf of a City employee who alleged age discrimination. The complainant took a disability leave shortly after filing his complaint thereby minimizing the damages. The settlement was the by-product of a mediation conference. The Commission obtained $3,000 on behalf of an employee of a restaurant. The allegations were that the complainant’s supervisor made one derogatory remark concerning complainant’s skin color, made in response to complainant’s insubordination. The complainant was terminated after filing a complaint with the Commission; however, the Commission determined the termination was justified based upon an inappropriate remark made by the complainant to another supervisor. This settlement was the by-product of a mediation conference.
The Commission obtained $1,000 for an individual who alleged that he was denied employment due to his conviction record. The employer alleged that the complainant lied on his application. The Commission obtained $17,000 on behalf of a disabled employee who was terminated during a documented short-term disability leave. The complainant was only working at the location for a short period and decided she did not wish to return. The Commission obtained $19,000 for an ironworker who was terminated after being on a documented disability leave for six months. |
