CHRO ex. rel. Lenotti v. City of Stamford - Connecticut Employment ...
CHRO ex. rel. Lenotti v. City of Stamford - Connecticut Employment ...
CHRO ex. rel. Lenotti v. City of Stamford - Connecticut Employment ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
egulations provide for the commission investigator to conduct intake, fact finding,mediation and conciliation meetings and the complainant testified that he attendedmeetings with an investigator at the Bridgeport regional <strong>of</strong>fice. Tr. 1070; Regs., Conn.State Agencies § 46a-54-1a. I find the complainant to be credible, but without specificevidence (testimony or documentation) regarding the type <strong>of</strong> meetings he attended oneach <strong>of</strong> the sixteen vacation days lost, I find reimbursement for ten days <strong>of</strong> vacationtime to be reasonable and fair. FF 44.There is evidence in the record to show the complainant is able to perform theessential functions <strong>of</strong> the captain position with or without a reasonable accommodation.Here, I find, in order to make the complainant whole, it is necessary to bypass theinterview process and appoint the complainant to the n<strong>ex</strong>t available position <strong>of</strong> captainin the event that he completes either <strong>of</strong> the above stated captain <strong>ex</strong>ams with anaccommodation and obtains the required score.IVORDER1. The respondent shall issue the captain promotional <strong>ex</strong>am to the complainanteither between September 1 and December 31, 2008 and provide thecomplainant with at least four months prior written notice <strong>of</strong> the <strong>ex</strong>am issuancedate;or the complainant may take the captain <strong>ex</strong>am on the n<strong>ex</strong>t regularly scheduleddate that the captain <strong>ex</strong>am is due to be administered. The complainant shallPage 46 <strong>of</strong> 49
Change language