News on U.S. government agencies, U.S. politics, companies doing business with U.S. federal government. Read U.S. national and local news. This site is not affiliated with United States Government.
(EMAILWIRE.COM, January 12, 2012 ) New York, NY -- On September 13, 2010, Adolfo Carrion Jr., HUDÂ’s Regional Administrator for New York and New Jersey, announced that he was promoting Mirza Negron-Morales, Director, Office of Public Housing in New York, to the position of Deputy Regional Administrator for New York and New Jersey. Ms. Negron-Morales had previously been found guilty of repeatedly discriminating against an employee in her department.
On September 1, 2010, EEOC Judge William Macauley issued a decision in which he found that United States Department of Housing and Urban Development intentionally retaliated against Thomas Saracco, an engineer who formerly worked in HUDÂ’s Office of Public Housing in New York City, in retaliation for a federal lawsuit2 filed by Mr. Saracco against HUD based on disability (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) discrimination (Saracco v. HUD, EEOC Hearing No. 520-2009-00104X).
Judge Macauley found that HUD had denied a promotion for Mr. Saracco that had been granted to every other engineer in the country except one. The HUD official centrally responsible for the denial of the promotion was Mirza Negron-Morales, then the Director for New York of HUDÂ’s Office of Public Housing. Judge Macauley found that her testimony in the case was not credible and that the justification she advanced for not promoting Mr. Saracco was "a mere pretext to retaliate" against him.
Less than two weeks after Judge MacauleyÂ’s decision, on September 13, 2010, Adolfo Carrion Jr., HUDÂ’s Regional Administrator for New York and New Jersey, announced that he was promoting Negron-Morales to the position of Deputy Regional Administrator.
Notably, this was not the first time Judge Macauley had found that Negron-Morales had intentionally discriminated against Mr. Saracco. In a decision dated April 24, 2006, Judge Macauley found that Negron-Morales had retaliated against Mr. Saracco by suspending him on two occasions because he had filed the federal lawsuit and made other complaints of discrimination. (EEOC Case No. 160-2005-00337X) In that decision Judge Macauley found that Negron-Morales directly admitted that she suspended Mr. Saracco in retaliation for his protected conduct and that she "has expressed her retaliatory animus against [Mr. Saracco] on more than one occasion." Further, Judge Macauley determined that "Negron-Morales was preoccupied with [Mr. SaraccoÂ’s] EEO history and held retaliatory animus toward him." Finally, Judge Macauley expressly found that "Negron-MoralesÂ’ reasons for suspending [Mr. Saracco] were not credible ones."
In June, 2007 HUD placed Mr. Saracco on unpaid administrative leave claiming that a psychiatrist had determined that he was a threat to himself and others. He reached this conclusion after being provided misleading information by HUD. This included the two suspensions noted above which were ordered expunged by the judge. The psychiatrist never spoke with Mr. Saracco.
Mr. Saracco was required to provide a Fitness for Duty report, which he did. HUD still would not allow Mr. Saracco to return to work. Finally in June, 2008, more than one year after being placed on administrative leave, Mr. Saracco was told he could return to work.
In 2008, Mr. Saracco resigned from HUD and filed an appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB Docket Nos.:NY-0752-09-0195-I-1, NY-0752-09-0197-I-1) alleging constructive termination and a suspension of more than 14 days. In 2011, HUD paid Mr. Saracco approximately $700,000 in order to settle that appeal together with the EEOC case.
Mr. Saracco was represented by David N. Mair of Kaiser Saurborn & Mair, P.C. in New York City.
1. Federal regulations require that employees found to have violated federal anti-discrimination laws be disciplined. (See EEOC.gov) Ms. Negron-Morales violated these laws, yet she was never disciplined by HUD. In fact, rather than being disciplined, she was promoted by Mr. Carrion!
2. The federal lawsuit was filed in 2002 and resulted in a settlement in 2003. This case began as a complaint before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in January, 2000; EEOC Hearing No. 160-A1-8243X. The complaint arose from (i) HUD's failure to provide Mr. Saracco a reasonable accommodation for his disability (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) and (ii) the concerted harassment of Mr. Saracco by HUD's employees because of his disability and in retaliation for his complaints of discrimination filed with HUD's Equal Employment Opportunity Office and the EEOC.
We are pleased to offer you this exciting, new, and entirely free professional resource. Visit our Free Industry resource center today to browse our selection of 600+ complimentary Industry magazines, white papers, webinars, podcasts, and more. Get popular titles including:
