Overview: In Aime v. MA Department of Correction, the MCAD found for the Respondent and dismissed a Correction Officer’s allegations of retaliation. The Complainant—who had previously filed a discrimination complaint that was ultimately dismissed—was an African American male with over 20 years in his role at the DOC. Although the…
Articles Posted in 2016
MCAD Digest: Adelabu v. Teradyne Inc., Burns, and Schwartz…Employee Wins Racial Discrimination Case
Overview: In Adelabu v. Teradyne Inc. Burns and Schwartz, the MCAD found in favor of the Complainant and awarded emotional distress damages for race-based discrimination. There was sufficient evidence that the Respondent manager expected a greater degree of deference from black subordinates than from white ones. The hostile environment that…
MCAD Digest: Tsigas v. Department of Correction…Correction Officer’s Disability Discrimination Claim is Dismissed
Overview: In Tsigas v. Department of Correction, the MCAD found in favor of the Respondent and dismissed the Complainant’s disability discrimination claim. The factual record established that the Complainant was not a handicapped individual as defined by statute, as his medical history presented “an array of conflicting symptoms that cannot…
MCAD Digest: Diaz v. Ace Metal Finishing Inc.…Disability Discrimination Case Against Industrial Company is Dismissed
Overview: In Diaz v. Ace Metal Finishing Inc., the MCAD found in favor of the Respondent industrial company and dismissed the complaint alleging termination of employment based on disability. The Complainant, who went out on a six-month medical leave when his chronic leg condition worsened, was laid off upon returning…
MCAD Digest: Pavoni v. Wheely Funn Inc.…Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment Case is Dismissed
Overview: In Pavoni v. Wheely Funn Inc., the MCAD found in favor of the Respondent and dismissed the complaint alleging quid pro quo sexual harassment and retaliation against a roller skating rink owner. The Complainant did establish a prima facie case based on the temporal proximity between her rejection of…
MCAD Digest: Santos v. X-Treme Silkscreen & Design …Employee Gets Emotional Distress Damages in Disability Discrimination Case
Overview: In Santos v. X-Treme Silkscreen & Design, the MCAD found in favor of the Complainant and awarded emotional distress damages for disability discrimination. The MCAD also amended the complaint to add as an individual the sole owner of the Respondent silk screening and embroidery company. Evidence established that the…
MCAD Digest: Gutierrez-Dupuis v. Gabriel Care, LLC…Employee Wins Retaliation Case Despite Colleague’s Failed Discrimination Claim
Overview: In Gutierrez-Dupuis v. Gabriel Care, LLC, the MCAD found in favor of Complainant Dupuis on her retaliation claim, but it found against Complainant Gutierrez on her claims of retaliation and discrimination based on national origin and race. There was no credible evidence to support claims that Gutierrez was told…
MCAD Digest: Patterson v. Ahold USA, Inc.…Employee Wins Discrimination Case for Unconscious Racial Bias
Overview: In Patterson v. Ahold USA, Inc., the MCAD found in favor of the Complainant and awarded back pay, front pay, and emotional distress damages for race-based discrimination. The parent company of Stop & Shop terminated the Complainant’s position in the corporate headquarters due to a reorganization and filled other…
MCAD Digest: Harper v. Z2A Enterprises…Employee Wins Sexual Harassment Case Following Default Hearing
Overview: In Harper v. Z2A Enterprises, the MCAD found in favor of the Complainant, awarding emotional distress damages and three months of back pay in a sexual harassment claim against the operator of the Half Time Sports Bar and Grill. The Respondents failed to appear at the hearing, and an…
MCAD Digest: Tinker v. Securitas Security Services and Hussain…Employee Wins Gender Identity Discrimination Case
Overview: In Tinker v. Securitas Security Services and Hussain, the MCAD found in favor of the Complainant and awarded emotional distress damages for discrimination based on sex/gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation. The Complainant, who previously identified as a woman and a lesbian, notified the Respondent that he was transgender…