Liblady wrote:
At the time I wrote up the incident report, I explained in an accompanying e-mail that I attributed the act to autism and had now found an appropriate therapist. I went to the autism spectrum counselor and she was shocked that my psychiatrist (who was treating me for clinical depression and to whom I had previously confided my suspicions that I had Aspergers) hadn't yet given me my official diagnosis. Though I couldn't continue with the autism spectrum counselor, because of an alleged conflict of interest, she recommended to my psychiatrist that he give me my offical diagnosis, which he did, and I submitted my letter of diagnosis to the Personnel Department, my chain of command at the library, and City Investigations when I was called to give my version of the incident.
Next thing I knew I had been scheduled for a fitness-for-duty examination, which my library director alleged was for the dual reasons of the original incident and the autism spectrum diagnosis. In a couple of meetings in her office as well as a previous e-mail, my library director seemed to be skeptical of my autism diagnosis and even the existence of autism, whether Asperger's or classic, at all. She also dredged up a lot of things unrelated to the incident that displayed her personal antipathy to me.
Rather than wait for the fitness-for-duty appointment, she next ran up the charges in the original incident to "assault" and "fighting", so she could recommend termination.
I hired an attorney.
After being on adminstrative leave for a couple of weeks, I had my City Hearing and was officially terminated as of Sept. 20. My original plan had been to make my appeal to the Personnel Board and then file a complaint with the EEOC if that failed.
Based on this fact pattern, you probably have a good EEOC case. Once an employer is put on notice of a disability, any harmful act against that employee can be presumed to be retaliatory. Your supervisor going for your termination AFTER being notified of your status is evidence of trying to get rid of you after learning of a potential disability. Your employer would have to make the case that they DID NOT discriminate against you.
Liblady wrote:
It seems the City Attorney is nervous about the potential EEOC suit, so he apparently approached my lawyer to propose that I apply for disability retirement with the City, even though I've already been discharged. I would only be paid 26% of my previous salary plus benefits, but I could remove that discharge from my work history and could look for work elsewhere provided my salary and retirement benefit did not exceed my previous salary.
When my attorney told me about the option, I expressed some doubt due to the request having to go through my library director and her presence on the board that approves it.
Do you think I'm right to try for the disability retirement?
I would say your job there is toast. You could NEVER work with this woman again without fear of reprisal...based on her actions to date. SHE has poisoned the well...so to speak.
1. I would go for the disability retirement IF you could survive on what they are offering (be sure to look into if you have to pay taxes on that amount as it will determine how far it goes). If the amount is insufficient, demand more to cover your necessities.
2. I would require a full expungement of any negative report on your work file AND a gag order prohibiting anything negative about the incident or your condition being communicated to anyone.
3. Your supervisor should be barred from any part of this process as she is a party with a conflict of interest. Standard protocol requires such parties to recuse themselves as they can not claim to act without a bias.
I'd be okay with them denying continuation of your "retirement" benefits once you are making as much or more as your previous position, but ask that the lawyer look into the details carefully. As they will continue your "benefits" on top of 26% of your salary, the cut off shouldn't just be based on salary alone...you might not be offered equivalent or superior benefits.
09 Oct 2013, 4:00 pm
