Former in-house counsel for a Connecticut water and sewer company claimed she lost a promotion, and later her job, after she had a baby.

Erin Ryan worked for the state's Metropolitan District Commission, a nonprofit municipal corporation serving the Hartford area. She joined in January 2011 as an assistant district counsel representing the MDC on labor relations and affirmative action cases.

But by July 2017, she was the one who needed a labor lawyer, after the agency denied her a promotion and later fired her. Ryan had been hoping to become director of human resources, but instead, her suit claims her employer cut ties about 14 months after she returned from maternity leave.

“The defendant's actions in not hiring the plaintiff for the director of HR position were motivated by her gender,” according to Ryan's complaint, filed June 1 in Hartford in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.

It's a dramatic turnaround for the one-time district counsel. Even though she's now the plaintiff, Ryan used to be co-defendant in several suits by former employees accusing MDC of racial bias and discrimination based on disability. Back then, the suits came from fired employees, who claimed the agency retaliated against them by slashing their jobs after they lodged discrimination complaints.

These firings followed $2.1 million in losses after the MDC lost its contract to handle daily operations for the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority's trash-to-energy facility, according to the Yankee Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank in Connecticut. The agency settled four claims and rehired the fifth plaintiffs. It paid $630,000, and credited one plaintiff six years' employment and salary increase raises to allow her to receive a pension. In another case, it paid $220,000 to resolve claims it systematically denied its former affirmative action officer promotions, and once called police to search that employee for weapons.

Back then, in 2011, plaintiffs said Ryan was among the MDC officials deciding which employees got to stay and which would be out of work.

“We are familiar with the MDC's history with respect to discrimination and retaliation,” said Ryan's attorney Gregg Adler, who helped bring one of the past suits against the agency. ”The fact that Ms. Ryan may have been the victim of discrimination and retaliation by the same decision-makers is not ironic, but consistent.”

Ryan filed administrative charges of discrimination and retaliation with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities and with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission in September 2017. She received a release of jurisdiction from the Commission on Human Rights and a notice of right to sue from the EEOC, laying the groundwork for her complaint in federal court.

Fired Over 'Family Status'?

Ryan's gender discrimination lawsuit claims the agency fired her after she took maternity leave and wanted to adjust her schedule to work four days a week, instead of five. It alleges CEO Scott Jellison cited Ryan's “family status” as the reason for denying her the promotion.

About three months later, Ryan was out of a job, according to her lawsuit.

MDC disagreed so strongly with the allegations, it issued a public statement, despite its policy not to comment on public litigation.

“As this matter unfolded over the course of several months, and as the complaint confirms, district staff met several times with Ms. Ryan in good faith to discuss and address various matters relating to her employment, without success,” the statement reads.

MDC is a quasi-municipal corporation that provides water to 12 Connecticut municipalities including Hartford and West Hartford. It was served with court papers late Monday, but no attorney had been assigned to represent it by press time on Tuesday morning.

“The district strongly disagrees with many of the facts alleged by Ms. Ryan, and intends to aggressively defend the reasonable and appropriate employment actions taken by our senior management staff in this matter,” the agency said. “At no time did the district as an organization or any of our employees act in a discriminatory or retaliatory manner against Ms. Ryan, and specifically, and in no way was the decision not to appoint her for a second time as director of human resources based upon her family status. The facts set forth in the complaint to support this specific allegation are simply not true.”

Ryan became MDC's interim director for human resources six months after her hire in January 2011. About a year later, in June 2012, she became permanent director. She was on maternity leave from December 2015 through May 2016. During that time, she discussed with Jellison the possibility of working four days a week in her HR director role when she returned, according to her court pleadings. Jellison said that was not an option, so Ryan accepted a new assignment with the business transformation team, where she'd work on the implementation of a cloud-based HR platform four days a week.

In March 2017, Ryan responded to an internal job posting for the vacant director of HR post. Her lawsuit says she and former direct report Robert Zaik were the only two applicants for the job. A month later, the lawsuit says, Jellison told Ryan he'd selected Zaik because he was more of a “do-er,” while she was more of a “policy person.” Believing she was more qualified than Zaik, Ryan requested copies of the recruitment file under the Freedom of Information Act. It was soon after the request for information that Ryan says Jellison told her—with another employee in the room—that she didn't get the job because of her family status.

Ryan said management assured her she'd have a job within MDC after the cloud-based HR platform went live. But about eight months before the February 2018 launch, MDC assistant district counsel Christopher Stone told her the agency was letting her go.

The lawsuit says Stone told Ryan there was no longer any work for her on the business transformation team because of delays on the project. Ryan asked about two other posts within MDC—an HR generalist and a position within the agency's legal department. The suit claims she was qualified for both.

“Stone told the plaintiff neither was an option,” the lawsuit says.

During her employment with MDC, Ryan got one performance review when she served as HR director in February 2013, according to the complaint. She scored the highest possible rating, an “A” for “outstanding,” and positive comments from then-Deputy CEO John Zinzarella, according to the suit.

Ryan alleged MDC broke state and federal laws in firing her. She cited violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act. Her four-count complaint alleges discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII and CFEPA. The lawsuit seeks Ryan's reinstatement to the HR post “or to a substantially similar position.” It also seeks lost wages, lost benefits and compensatory and punitive damages.

Adler and Nicole Rothgeb, both of Livingston, Adler, Pulda, Meiklejohn & Kelly in Hartford, represented Ryan. Both attorneys declined to comment Monday, and Ryan could not be reached by press time.

Meanwhile, employment and labor law attorney Anthony Pantuso III, who is not involved in the litigation, suggested Ryan might have an advantage in the litigation if she could prove Jellison denied her the promotion because of her family status.

“The law says you can't treat men and women differently in these circumstances,” Pantuso said. “It's rare to find a new father that will be discriminated against, as opposed to a new mother.”

The lawsuit alleges Jellison made the comment in front of another MDC employee, Mario Calderon, whom Ryan brought with her to the meeting.

“You can't take someone's family situation into account when making an employment decision like that. It's illegal,” said Pantuso, a Shelton-based solo practitioner. “If she did have a co-worker who overheard this, that co-worker's testimony is going to be very important. If this occurred the way the plaintiff describes it, it is a violation of both state and federal law.”

Ryan's request for a different schedule seems unlikely to affect her case.

“As far as any red flags with asking for a four-day work week, there are none,” Pantuso told the Connecticut Law Tribune.

The case is pending before U.S. District Judge Vanessa Bryant of the District of Connecticut.

Read the complaint:

Here's the full MDC response: