Public Hearing Summaries – Commission For Human Rights

In Vilma Anderson vs. Anchorage School District, complainant alleged that respondent discriminated against her on the basis of her physical disability, retinitis pigmentosa, which causes her tunnel vision and blindness. Complainant alleged that respondent terminated her employment as a substitute teacher because it wrongly believed she could not safely and effectively do her job. Complainant also alleged that respondent refused to accommodate her by not allowing her to bring her service dog to work. A public hearing was held on December 2-5, 2009, before the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). On April 27, 2010, the administrative law judge issued a recommended decision finding that the school district violated the Human Rights Law and ordering it to pay the complainant back pay of $43,000, plus interest, and to obtain training for its managers and supervisors. On July 30, 2010, the Commission adopted the recommended decision with one modification, expanding the required training from 3 hours in length to 8 hours.

In Harry Ross vs. SOA, DCED, Alaska Railroad, complainant alleged that respondent failed to promote him because of his race, Black. After a public hearing, the Commission dismissed the case. Complainant appealed the decision to superior court, and on March 30, 2012, the court reversed the Commission’s decision and remanded the case to the Commission. The Commission referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, and the parties briefed the issues on remand to an administrative law judge. Briefing was completed on December 11, 2012. On April 28, 2014, the administrative law judge issued a decision recommending that the Commission again dismiss the case. On May 19, 2014, the ALJ forwarded the record to the Commission. On August 30, 2016, the Commission issued a final order dismissing the case.

In Lester Hubbard vs. Alaska Computer Essentials, Inc., complainant alleged that respondent discriminated against him on the basis of his disability, paraplegia. Complainant alleged that as a student in respondent’s computer class he was unable to use the restroom because respondent’s business lacked facilities that were accessible to persons who use wheelchairs for mobility. On June 29, 2009, an administrative law judge (ALJ) issued a preliminary default judgment based on respondent’s repeated failure to respond to motions or discovery requests, and found that respondent had violated the Human Rights Law. On October 29, 2009, the Commission adopted the ALJ’s recommendation and issued an order directing respondent to make its facilities accessible or to provide its services at an alternative accessible location.