By Mitchel Wilson
In Zasada v. City of Englewood, 117 FEP Cases 1454 (2013), the court denied the City’s motion to dismiss Zasada’s claim of a hostile work environment because of his national origin, claim of discrimination based on national origin, and equal protection claims when he was referred to in a derogatory manner and experienced an adverse employment action.
Officer Zasada, a native of Poland, first began experiencing obstacles at work when his supervisor referred to him as a “Pollock”. This happened on several occasions, often in front of other officers, as a joke at Zasada’s expense. Zasada confronted the supervisor, asking him to stop, and complained of the conduct to his Sergeant. Further, Zasada was denied training given to other officers, such as bicycle patrol training. He did receive training in the martial art Krav Maga, and in turn trained a female officer. That officer is from Russia and the two bonded over their shared eastern-European heritage. The Commander accused the Zasada of having a sexual relationship with her, which he denied, and ordered Zasada to stop interacting with her.
After filing complaints with his Sergeant, Zasada was transferred to records and later terminated by the Police Chief. The termination was based on uninvestigated reports from Zasada’s Sergeant, because he “did not get along with other agents and was inappropriately conducting surveillance on his own”.
Mr. Zasada’s hostile work environment and discrimination claims were deemed by the court to be trial worthy because he alleged at least three specific instances where the word “Pollock” was used as a pejorative and that his supervisor used it in increasing frequency. Although notice to the City is required to bring a hostile work environment claim and Zasada failed to report these instances to Human Resources, the court concluded that the city could have notice since Zasada complained to his Sergeant, his supervisor with the City. Although Zasada’s supervisor was not a city employee, the employer could be responsible for third party harassment where it knew or should have known about the harassment.
