1993 memorandum elucidating Free chat sex with aunty throgh mobile
On or about April 15, 1998, Berkley prepared (and eventually mailed to the respondent) a medical certificate documenting the complainants condition as observed in his March 30 evaluation. R-12) (Based on the date-stamp on the document, the respondent apparently received this on or about May 4, 1998 (Ex. The complainant checked back periodically between June and September, but was told by Alling that the only vacancies were for career trainee positions, which were comparable to what the respondent had done ten years earlier and which would have involved a substantial financial setback for the complainant.
C-21) The complainant was also absent the following day, but he did not call the respondent. C-21) Thereafter, the complainant did not return to work. On March 30, 1998, the complainant was evaluated by a psychiatrist, Richard Berkley, who, among other things, placed him on stronger medication.
On or about March 30, 1998 (probably just before or after his consultation with Berkley), the complainant telephoned Roy and asked her if he could work on a file at home.
Saksena, 24; Roy, 165-67, 172) Later Roy discussed the complainants request with Anne Alling, the DRS human resources administrator. Lyons, who claims he did not know if employees were allowed to work at home, told the complainant that he "would run it through the chain of command" and get back to him. Cleary briefly discussed the request with Roy and left a message for her supervisor, Hans Spalter; about a week later, she spoke with Alling. Lyons, 244) Mc Kellar likewise was aware of the complainants health issues; when he had spoken to the complainant by telephone on March 17, 1997, the complainant told him that he was depressed and taking medication. I have advised him against going into his office but agree that he can perform work from his home or in the field. After Roy received Berkleys letter, she prepared the paperwork needed to put the complainant on full time leave under the FMLA until May 1, 1998.
His personnel file contained at least two letters of commendation from companies he audited, as well as a "customer service questionnaire" bearing praise for his work. The ADA prohibits covered employers from discriminating against an otherwise qualified individual "because of the disability of such individual in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment." 42 U.
The complainant alleges that the respondents failure to provide him with reasonable accommodation constitutes unlawful discrimination on the basis of his disability in violation of the ADA and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act ("FEPA"). According to the ADA, unlawful discrimination includes: not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business of such covered entity .