Lawsuit: Bank of America Obligated to Give Disabled Woman Less Strenuous Job
Sarena Salmeri sued Bank of America, claiming it was obligated under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act to give her a less strenuous job when a vacancy opened.
February 13, 2019 at 04:22 PM
4 minute read
A woman who suffers from a disorder that affects concentrating, communicating and thinking has sued Bank of America, claiming that under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, she should have been given a less strenuous job when one opened up at the Farmington call center where she worked.
In her federal lawsuit, filed Feb. 7 in Connecticut, Southington resident Sarena Salmeri said the bank discriminated against her by not giving her the position in its Outbound Department. Salmeri, who was an inbound specialist, took incoming calls from customers and answered their questions regarding home equity lines of credit. She argued that her job is more frenetic and busy than working as an outbound specialist, where she would have had to contact customers to review the terms and conditions of their mortgages, among other tasks.
The lawsuit said Bank of America was obligated to give Salmeri, who has Central Auditory Processing Disorder, the job of outbound specialist since there were two vacancies in that department. The bank would have an out if the accommodation would cause the institution undue hardship, which Thomas Durkin, Salmeri's attorney who is affiliated with The Hayber Law Firm, said it does not. Those who ended up getting the two vacant jobs are not disabled.
As of press time, Bank of America had not assigned an attorney to the case. Christopher Feeney, its senior vice president of corporate communications, declined to comment. In 2018, the American Association of People with Disabilities named Bank of America among the best places to work for disability inclusion.
But Salmeri's lawsuit suggests otherwise. Her complaint quotes from the U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission in 2002. It states: “Does reassignment mean that the employee is permitted to compete for a vacant position? No. Reassignment means that the employee gets the vacant position if s/he is qualified for it. Otherwise, reassignment would be of little value and would not be implemented as Congress intended.”
Durkin said Wednesday his client was qualified for the job of outbound specialist.
“We are alleging [the bank] violated the ADA by not reassigning her,” he said. “The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is an interpretative guidance for the ADA.”
Salmeri, the lawsuit said, sought to work in the outbound department because, among other things, she “struggled to process the audibly-received information she obtained from customers and transcribe the information fast enough after completing phone calls” to adhere to what was required of her. She, therefore, often did not meet performance metrics, the lawsuit said.
Durkin said under the ADA, Salmeri should not have competed for the vacant job, but Bank of America insisted she do just that. But the lawsuit suggests she wouldn't have gotten the job in any event. It states that Salmeri's immediate supervisor, Jayme Mosier, at one point told the plaintiff during the interviewing process she would “never get that position” and to “get that idea out of [her] head.”
Salmeri worked for Bank of America for 13 months. But on June 9, 2017, the bank informed her that this would be her last day of work, and that it had placed her on a disability leave of absence.
“My client was forced on the leave,” Durkin said. “She knows if she returned to work as an inbound specialist she'd be subject to discipline if she was unable to meet the performance metrics. That was the reason she was seeking a transfer to outbound to begin with.”
Durkin said he is seeking damages in the “six figures” for his client, who currently works at a martial arts center.
Assisting Durkin was his colleague, attorney Deborah McKenna.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250