The State Worker

Chronicling civil-service life for California state workers

January 4, 2012
CCPOA settles former employee's discrimination lawsuit

Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for 100602 yolo county gavel.jpgThe California Correctional Peace Officers Association has settled a discrimination and unfair treatment lawsuit brought by a former longtime employee whose husband had been a 2008 candidate for the union's presidency.

The terms of the settlement are confidential.

CCPOA spokesman JeVaughn Baker said that the union "rejects all of the allegations," but made a "pragmatic business decision" to settle.

"At some point you have to count the beans," Baker said this morning. "This is a low-level employment issue, an internal issue."

A call to former employee Sharon Rafferty's attorney, James E. McGlamery, wasn't immediately returned.

Communications liaison Rafferty had worked for CCPOA for nearly 25 years before she was terminated and sued the union in 2009.

She alleged that after her husband, Dan Rafferty, announced in 2008 he was running "against a candidate that was favored by Management of the CCPOA," that she "was subjected to unwarranted, unfair, discriminatory treatment by Management of CCPOA," according to her November 2009 complaint. Mike Jimenez, CCPOA's current president, won reelection to his second three-year term in September 2008.

Rafferty went out on stress leave, and the union eventually terminated her position. She filed complaints with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. When those weren't successful, Rafferty sued in Sacramento civil court for lost earnings and damages.

She accused CCPOA of seven violations that included breach of contract and various forms of employer discrimination.

In January 2010, CCPOA offered a 12-point defense to Rafferty's complaint.

Last August, Sacramento Superior Court Judge David Brown summarily ruled against all but one complaint, that CCPOA had retaliated against Rafferty. Click here to download Brown's order.

Jury selection on the surviving complaint started Tuesday morning. Here's what happened next, according to the court's account:

After the noon recess, the Court and counsel had settlement discussions.

After discussions with the Court, counsel indicated the matter has settled.

Counsel stated the settlement into the record. The Court indicated this agreement is with a confidentiality clause. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter up to 18 months as stated into the record.

Court adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

IMAGE: www.yolocourts.ca.gov

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.

hide comments
blog comments powered by Disqus


About The State Worker

Jon Ortiz The Author

Jon Ortiz launched The State Worker blog and a companion column in 2008 to cover state government from the perspective of California government employees. Every day he filters the news through a single question: "What does this mean for state workers?" Join Ortiz for updates and debate on state pay, benefits, pensions, contracts and jobs. Contact him at (916) 321-1043 and at jortiz@sacbee.com.

FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK

State Pay Database

This database allows you to search the salaries of California's 300,000-plus state workers and view up to four years of their pay history.

Categories


May 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Monthly Archives