Discrimination in the workplace is one of those unfortunate practices that can go on for years without ever being discovered. Occasionally, though, this kind of behavior is exposed and winds up on the front page of every newspaper, especially when the employer involved is an outspoken local politician like Brooklyn Borough president Marty Markowitz. Female former staff members of Markowitz's filed a lawsuit against the elected official that paints an unsavory picture of inner-office sexism, favoritism, and abuse.

Court documents claim that Marty Markowitz admitted to keeping a slovenly, absentee male staff member on the payroll even though he should have been fired. The claim is filled with allegations that the politician repeatedly deemed female workers incompetent, and he even referred to one former female employee as "Tinkerbell." Another complaint in the report comes from the fourth woman mentioned in the lawsuit who claims to have heard Markowitz and his former chief of staff telling lewd jokes.

Regina Weiss, who is named as the plaintiff in the lawsuit, was the former chief of communications for Markowitz and claims that several staff members were recruited to work on Markowitz's 2005 campaign while on the city's time and payroll. Weiss and a half a dozen other staffers were allegedly asked to work on campaign press releases and were asked to assist in helping him prepare for an upcoming debate. Campaign related duties are to take place on a separate payroll and not during city hours or in city facilities.

Markowitz has fervently denied the allegations while blasting Weiss and her claims. He did admit to calling a former employee Tinkerbell because she supposedly left her belongings scattered about the office like fairy dust. Markowitz has also admitted to keeping the male staffer with scant attendance and unprofessional appearance but out of compassion and not favoritism. Meanwhile, the New York press is having a field day with the allegations against Markowitz and are waiting to see if any more scandalous details will be brought to light.

A startling number of discrimination cases are popping up in temporary employment agencies across the country. The reason?  It is hard to say, but the general thought is that even though these agencies operate on a high-turnover basis and tracking cases of discrimination within them can be nearly impossible, some cases have come to light that point to a larger problem.

Just this week, Melville, a New York-based Olsten temporary agency, settled a lawsuit that started in their Lacrosse, Wisconsin, branch. The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleged that Olsten Staffing Services blatantly denied Zachary Schaefer a temporary position at Main Street Ingredients, a local food manufacturer, because Schaefer is deaf. The EEOC claimed that the ability to hear was not a clear job requirement, thus making Schaefer a viable candidate for the temporary position. The agency has agreed to pay Schaefer $70,000 in damages and $5,000 in lost pay. The company will also offer their employees training on the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.

It seems some cases where people of color, with disabilities, or of a certain age have been denied jobs by temporary agencies are starting to be better reported. Just the same, well-known companies and trusted businesses are also being taken to court for alleged discrimination lawsuits.

Billion-dollar Internet mega-market eBay is also being sued by a deaf person.  Melissa Earll of Nevada, Montana, claims that due to her disability she is unable to communicate vocally by telephone and therefore is unable to verify her identity with eBay. The federal lawsuit filed this past Tuesday targets eBay’s seller’s registration system that requires would-be sellers to identify themselves via telephone. The lawsuit says that the current system violates the California Disabled Person Act as it excludes deaf and hard-of-hearing patrons from equal opportunities. In addition to damages, the suit is seeking to reform eBay’s current registration system so that people with disabilities can participate as sellers like everyone else.

Related Pages:

Discrimination Lawyer San Francisco

Racial Discrimination Attorney San Francisco

Jennifer Paviglianti of Centereach, New York wanted to keep her pregnancy quiet from her boss John Doxey until she reached the three-month mark. Doxey is the owner of the gentlemen’s club Café Royale, and Jennifer is a bartender there, or at least she was. Gossip amongst her fellow employees reached Doxey before she was able to tell him the news of her pregnancy herself. Paviglianti says her now former employer immediately assumed that the pregnant bartender would be unable to do her job and she was soon fired from her position.   

On February 2, Jennifer Paviglianti filed charges of discrimination based on sex discrimination, retaliation, perceived disability discrimination, and pregnancy discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  According to Paviglianti, her employer repeatedly told her that customers of the Café Royal would not be pleased to see a pregnant woman behind the bar as they expected to be served by sexy bartenders. Furthermore, she claims that John Doxey told her that her pregnancy and appearance were actually hurting business.  

Soon, Jennifer found her shifts falling off the schedule and saw her paychecks dwindle. She claims he was trying to get her to quit and hitting her where it hurt. He also hired another bartender on the nights that she worked to cut into her already disappearing tips. The abuse, says Paviglianti, continued with Doxey finding ways to make her job more difficult, like forcing her to clean the bar with ammonia rather than safer products for pregnant women.  

Jennifer Paviglianti started to sense something was wrong so she did some research. After discovering that cases of employee discrimination were extremely hard to prove, she concocted a plan to tape record her boss. With little coaxing and within the confines of the law, Jennifer easily captured her boss on tape saying discriminating things about her being pregnant and how her condition was negatively affecting business. This tape became the smoking gun that Jennifer needed. Armed with the tape, lawyers, and her complaint with the EEOC, Jennifer has a real shot of protecting other pregnant women form facing the kind of discrimination she has.