By Zach Lowe
Staff Writer
September 7, 2007
STAMFORD - The state's human rights commission has denied the city's move to dismiss charges it wrongly denied a learning-disabled firefighter's request for extra time on a promotional test in 2002.
Lt. David Lenotti filed a complaint against the city after it denied him extra time again in 2005, records show.
The city has defended its decision, saying reading and interpreting information quickly is an essential part of a fire captain's job.
But disability rights experts have said the city may have violated rules by refusing Lenotti's requests. They also criticized the city for not having a standard procedure for receiving and evaluating employees' requests for extra time or some other change in a promotional test.
City officials have said they are working on a general policy.
An investigator for the state's Commission of Human Rights and Opportunities concluded last year the city's explanations for denying Lenotti extra time "lacked credibility," records show.
The case is scheduled for a hearing in front of the commission later this month, according to Lenotti's attorney, Michael Colombo.
Lenotti, who lives in Mamaroneck, N.Y., was diagnosed as learning disabled in 2000 and has been in treatment for attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, since 2004, records show. He has trouble reading and visualizing things at the same time and struggled toward the end of tests, he said last year.
Lenotti was surprised when the city denied his request for extra time in 2002 and 2005, he has said. City officials said they have never given applicants extra time on the lieutenant's or captain's exams. They often grant extra time on the firefighter's exam, officials said.
The reasoning is that lieutenants and captains must make split-second decisions at fire scenes based on floor plans, hazardous materials reports and other documents, officials said.
But several disability rights experts said employers can refuse to grant testing accommodations only on narrow grounds.
They could deny a request for extra time, for instance, if the test closely simulates a real-life job, said Scott LaBarre, a Colorado attorney and chairman of the American Bar Association's Commission on Mental Health and Physical Disability Law.
The city would be within its rights if the test were a mock fire scene or hazardous materials spill, LaBarre said.
The city uses a 100-question multiple-choice test. That likely does not satisfy the requirements, LaBarre and other experts have said.
The city moved to dismiss Lenotti's complaint about the 2002 test because they claimed Lenotti did not file it on time under state law, according to a copy of the city's motion.
In his response, Colombo argued the 2002 denial was part of an ongoing pattern of discrimination and should be considered with the 2005 case, records show. The commission sided with Colombo.
The panel also ruled Lenotti cannot receive any back pay for the years 2002-05 as part of any settlement, Colombo said.
The case resumes in Hartford on Sept. 24, attorneys said.
Copyright © 2007, Southern Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.