Public Hearing Summaries – Commission For Human Rights

In Makaen Serr vs. I.C.E. Services, Inc., complainant alleged that respondent treated her as a person with a disability when it terminated her employment as a dishwasher working at respondent’s facility on the North Slope. Complainant asserted that she was fully capable of performing her job and that she was considered a valuable employee by her superiors in the company. A hearing scheduled for February 24–25, 2015 was continued after the parties entered into a settlement in which respondent agreed to pay complainant $60,000 and to obtain training for its supervisors and managers on the provisions of the Human Rights Law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability, and the obligation to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities. On October 11, 2016, the Executive Director filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the case after the terms of the agreement were substantially satisfied, and the Commission granted the motion on October 14, 2016.

In Daniel Morgan vs. American President Lines, Ltd., complainant, a longshoreman, alleged that respondent refused to provide him with crane operator training because of his age, fifty-six. A public hearing scheduled for February 26–27, 2015, was continued when the parties reached a settlement. After respondent satisfied the terms of the settlement the executive director requested dismissal of the case. The Commission issued an order dismissing the case on June 8, 2015.

In Doretta Wheeler vs. SOA, Dept. of Health and Social Services, Division of Alaska Pioneer Homes, complainant alleged that respondent discriminated against her because of her age, fifty-eight, and disability when it terminated her employment and subsequently refused to rehire her. A hearing was held on January 6–9, 2015. On October 30, 2015, the administrative law judge recommended that the Commission find that respondent discriminated against Ms. Wheeler and award her $84,716 in back pay, plus interest, and conduct training on the provisions of the Human Rights Law. On March 7, 2016, the Commission adopted the recommendation on back pay and, in addition, ordered the Respondent reinstate Ms. Wheeler to her position. The case was appealed to Superior Court on 3/30/2016 and a decision was issued 8/2/2017 affirming the Commission's decision.

In Candice Schuyler vs. Era Aviation, Inc. & HoTH, Inc., dba Era Alas, complainant, a flight attendant, alleged that she was discriminated against based on her age, sex and perception of physical disability when she was terminated while on leave recovering from an on-the-job injury. Ms. Schuyler was expected to fully recover after two months but was terminated after one month of leave. Before a hearing was scheduled, the parties reached an agreement to settle the case in which respondent agreed to provide training to its managers and supervisors on the provisions of the Human Rights Law. After respondent complied with the terms of the settlement the executive director requested dismissal of the case. The Commission issued an order dismissing the case on June 5, 2015.

In Ashley M. Lahaie vs. Subway, complainant alleged that her employer discriminated against her based on her sex and retaliated against her for complaining of discrimination. Ms. Lahaie alleged that after she complained about a co-worker’s unwelcome sexual advances, respondent transferred her to another store, demoted her from a supervisory capacity, and then removed her from the work schedule. A hearing was held on January 13–15, 2015. On July 16, 2015, the administrative law judge recommended that the Commission dismiss the case. The Commission issued an order dismissing the case on November 10, 2015.

In Nancy Cox vs. Parkview Condominiums Owners Association, complainants alleged that respondents discriminated against them when respondents refused to provide reasonable accommodations for their disabilities. Mr. Buxton and Ms. Cox requested that respondents allow them to park their car closer to their residence for loading and unloading purposes, but their requests were denied. A hearing scheduled for October 14–16, 2014, was continued when the parties entered into a settlement agreement in which respondents agreed to allow complainants to park their vehicle next to their condominium when necessary, adopt policies for providing reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, and obtain training on the provisions of the Human Rights Law that prohibit discrimination in housing. After the settlement terms were satisfied, Commission staff filed a motion with the Commission to dismiss the case on November 24, 2015. On December 14, 2015, the Commission granted the motion and dismissed the case.

In Littleton Buxton vs. Parkview Condominiums Owners Association, complainants alleged that respondents discriminated against them when respondents refused to provide reasonable accommodations for their disabilities. Mr. Buxton and Ms. Cox requested that respondents allow them to park their car closer to their residence for loading and unloading purposes, but their requests were denied. A hearing scheduled for October 14–16, 2014, was continued when the parties entered into a settlement agreement in which respondents agreed to allow complainants to park their vehicle next to their condominium when necessary, adopt policies for providing reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, and obtain training on the provisions of the Human Rights Law that prohibit discrimination in housing. After the settlement terms were satisfied, Commission staff filed a motion with the Commission to dismiss the case on November 24, 2015. On December 14, 2015, the Commission granted the motion and dismissed the case.