In Azab v. Great Neck, the plaintiff claimed that the elimination of the Cleaner-Attendant title was discriminatory. Plaintiff asserted her claims under both disparate treatment and disparate impact theories. In awarding the District summary judgment, the Court concluded that the District’s budgetary cuts were a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the elimination of the Cleaner-attendant positions. Significantly, the Court found that plaintiff did not dispute that the elimination of Cleaner-Attendant title was part of a larger $2.5 million in budget cuts. Moreover, the Court found the fact that two of the former female Cleaner-Attendants were rehired as Cleaners, a third retired and that plaintiff who did not apply for the Cleaner position was the only Cleaner-Attendant who was lost a job, severely undercut plaintiff’s claim that her job title and position were eliminated for a discriminatory reason. In reaching its decision, the Court also found persuasive the facts that the District employed far more females than males, and that the ratio of the layoffs between males and females from the budget cuts was gender neutral as both men and women were lay-off at a ratio of less than 1% to their total population in the District. Importantly, as two of the female Cleaner Attendants were re-hired, the Court also drew a distinction between the elimination of a position. and the termination of an employee for a discriminatory reason.
MSSSV Partner Maurizio Savoiardo handled the case. The decision is attached below.