to receive ongo<strong>in</strong>g cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g legal education on disability. 107 However, the Divisiondoes not otherwise allocate or orient staff as disability specialists. 108b) Division ResultsAlthough the statutory deadl<strong>in</strong>e for complet<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>vestigations is 180 days, <strong>in</strong> practice,the median time for <strong>in</strong>vestigation and determ<strong>in</strong>ation is 244 days. 109 Currently, 11% ofdisability compla<strong>in</strong>ts receive a probable cause determ<strong>in</strong>ation, allow<strong>in</strong>g the compla<strong>in</strong>antto proceed further. Relative to disability employment discrim<strong>in</strong>ation claims, this <strong>in</strong>dicatesthat roughly 200 claims per year are resolved by the Division, and 1700-1800 aredismissed. 110 Probable cause determ<strong>in</strong>ations for disability compla<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> the<strong>in</strong>vestigation phase are slightly higher than for other forms of discrim<strong>in</strong>ation (11% ascompared to 9% for all compla<strong>in</strong>ts). 111 The majority (63%) of those disability cases withprobable cause determ<strong>in</strong>ations are settled before or dur<strong>in</strong>g the hear<strong>in</strong>g process. 112 25%of disability cases with a probable cause determ<strong>in</strong>ation result <strong>in</strong> a completed trial. Ofthose that do proceed through trial, 12% of disability claims result <strong>in</strong> a favorable resultfor the compla<strong>in</strong>ant, as compared to approximately 20% of all compla<strong>in</strong>ts. 113 Incomparison, at the national level, the Equal <strong>Employment</strong> Opportunity Commission issubstantially less likely to f<strong>in</strong>d “reasonable cause” <strong>in</strong> disability <strong>in</strong>vestigations (5.1% <strong>in</strong>2009 as compared to 11% at the state level). 114 But for those compla<strong>in</strong>ants who areable to proceed to hear<strong>in</strong>g, the w<strong>in</strong> rate is much higher (over 40%, as compared to12%).The approximately 200 disability employment cases pursued by the Division <strong>in</strong> fiscalyear 2009-2010 resulted <strong>in</strong> $358,683 <strong>in</strong> monetary awards to compla<strong>in</strong>ants ($254, 450via settlement dur<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>vestigation phase, and an additional $54, 233 viahear<strong>in</strong>gs). 115 In 50 cases, compla<strong>in</strong>ants received a benefit. 116 In 31 <strong>in</strong>stances,compla<strong>in</strong>ants received an offer of employment, and another 23 received improvedemployment conditions. 117 In 2 <strong>in</strong>stances, compla<strong>in</strong>ants received a disabilityaccommodation. Remedies provided by the <strong>Employment</strong> Opportunity Commission arelargely comparable, with the exception that monetary awards through the EEOC are onaverage, substantially higher than those awarded through the Division; of 4,244compla<strong>in</strong>ants who received a merit resolution, the EEOC awarded $67.8 million <strong>in</strong> fiscal107 Interview with John Herrion, Director of <strong>Disability</strong> Rights, <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> Human Rights Division, April 23,2010.108 Id. One exception is the Director of <strong>Disability</strong> Rights.109 Correspondence with Division of Human Rights, August 3, 2010, on file with authors.110 Id.111 Correspondence with Division of Human Rights, September 2, 2010, on file with authors.112 Id.113 Id.114 Id; Equal <strong>Employment</strong> Opportunity Commission, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)Charges, FY 1997-FY 2009115 Correspondence with Division of Human Rights, September 14, 2010, on file with authors.116 Id.117 Id.To learn more go to http://www.nymakesworkpay.org17
<strong>Disability</strong> & <strong>Employment</strong> <strong>Law</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong>:Analysis and Recommendationsyear 2009-2010. 118 Specifically, damages at the national level were on average, 9 timeshigher when weighed proportionate to the number of compla<strong>in</strong>ants.The Division is empowered similarly to the federal EEOC, to engage <strong>in</strong> proactive/impactlitigation, where the discrim<strong>in</strong>atory practices of a particular employer meritstate <strong>in</strong>tervention. S<strong>in</strong>ce about 2008, the Division has had a Deputy Commissioner forDivision Initiated Investigations. The Division has used this power approximately 13times s<strong>in</strong>ce 2008 aga<strong>in</strong>st private and local government employers, but not <strong>in</strong> the contextof disability. 119G) Forms of ReliefForms of relief available through the Division of Human Rights, and through the statecourts are the same. 120 They <strong>in</strong>clude: Order<strong>in</strong>g the cessation of the unlawful discrim<strong>in</strong>atory practice; 121 Requir<strong>in</strong>g that the employer take actions to remedy the harm, such as hir<strong>in</strong>g orre<strong>in</strong>stat<strong>in</strong>g a worker, or provid<strong>in</strong>g a promotion, back pay, admission to a tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>gor apprenticeship program, requested accommodations, and access toadvantages, privileges, rights, or resources enjoyed by other employees. Otheractions to remedy the harm may be granted as deemed appropriate by the courtor the Division; 122 Award<strong>in</strong>g compensatory damages to the person with a disability to cover anylosses suffered as the result of discrim<strong>in</strong>ation. Note that the NYSHRL allowscompensatory damages, but not additional punitive damages (i.e., damagesbeyond the losses suffered, as punishment for the discrim<strong>in</strong>ation) <strong>in</strong> employmentdiscrim<strong>in</strong>ation cases; 123 Monitor<strong>in</strong>g employer compliance with any of the above remedies. 124In addition to the relief available to <strong>in</strong>dividual people with disabilities whoexperience discrim<strong>in</strong>ation, the court or the Division may require that an employer, whohas f<strong>in</strong>ancially ga<strong>in</strong>ed from the discrim<strong>in</strong>atory action, turn those profits over to thestate. 125 The court or the Division may assess additional f<strong>in</strong>es to be paid to the state, upto $50,000, and up to $100,000 <strong>in</strong> cases where the discrim<strong>in</strong>atory behavior is found tobe particularly extreme or malicious. 126118 Equal <strong>Employment</strong> Opportunity Commission, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) Charges,FY 1997-FY 2009119 Correspondence with Division of Human Rights, September 1, 2010, on file with authors.120 N.Y. Exec. <strong>Law</strong> §§ 297(4)(c), 297(9).121 Id. § 297(4)(c).122 Id.123 Id.124 Id.125 Id.126 Id.18