Posted on 04/03/2002 3:34:29 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
A pregnant secretary was not the victim of sex discrimination when she was fired by a boss who wanted to reassure his wife he wasn't romantically involved with the woman, a state appeals court has ruled.
The Supreme Court's Appellate Division said in a 5-0 decision Tuesday that Mayra Rivera-Maldonado was fired because the physician she worked for was trying to save his marriage not because of discrimination.
The court reversed the state Division of Human Rights' finding that Dr. Rainer N. Mittl, an ophthalmologist, discriminated against Rivera-Maldonado. The agency had awarded her more than $178,000 in back pay and damages.
"Mittl made up an excuse to fire her, and he fired her," said Kathleen Ann Waybourn, the woman's lawyer. Waybourn said her client will appeal.
Rivera-Maldonado, married and the mother of three, began working as Mittl's secretary in his Columbia Presbyterian Hospital office in October 1988. A year later she announced she was pregnant.
Rivera-Maldonado said she was fired on Feb. 27, 1990 because she was expecting, but the appeals panel said Mittl took the news of her pregnancy "in good spirit," even offering advice on filing for maternity leave and benefits.
As soon as Mittl's wife learned about the pregnancy, "she began displaying extreme animosity toward Rivera-Maldonado, even questioning whether (Mittl) was the father of the child," the judges wrote.
The court said that soon Mittl's wife "started calling Rivera-Maldonado at the office and speaking abusively to her, at one point even purporting to fire her."
"After unsuccessful efforts to calm his wife down, (Mittl) bowed to this seemingly irrational behavior and terminated Rivera-Maldonado's employment," the court wrote.
Waybourn, the lawyer, said she believes "this was Dr. Mittl's doing, and that he got the wife to help." She said Mittl's wife called Rivera-Maldonado once.
The human rights agency found in October 2000 that Rivera-Maldonado was a member of a protected class whose firing amounted to illegal sex discrimination. The appeals court disagreed.
"The record supports his contention that he was forced to choose between keeping his secretary on the payroll and saving his marriage," the judges said in their ruling. "Husbands presented with just this Hobson's choice have found support in the courts in the face of charges of sex discrimination."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49413,00.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.