Retaliation charges may be added to the discrimination charges outlined in a letter received by North Haven First Selectman Janet McCarty on May 11 from attorney Eugene Axelrod and town employee Leigh Gomez.

The letter claims that McCarty acted in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when she circuitously denied Gomez, an Afro-American, further employment in her office. McCarty and the town’s legal department have refuted the accusations.

Axelrod, of Axelrod and Associates in Woodbridge, said that he had hoped that the matter could be remedied as quickly and privately as possible. However, the matter was spread and made public, Axelrod said, causing Gomez to become “isolated and harassed by the First Selectman’s office and other administrators.” Because of this, Axelrod added, he and Gomez plan to add a retaliation claim to their charges.

“The purpose of the discrimination claim was to achieve the resolution of a dispute involving state and federal rights,” Axelrod said. “It was not supposed to trigger severe adverse reactions. This is the exact opposite of the purpose of the letter.”

Gomez was hired for her present position of assistant in McCarty’s office on May 17, 2008. According to the letter, Gomez was told “shortly after her hire” by McCarty that a “primary consideration for the high profile position was directly related to her Afro-American descent and, secondly, links to the younger North Haven population.”

The letter states that Gomez had performed her job’s responsibilities in a reasonable manner and has not been disciplined for any reason.

As it continues, the letter claims that around January 2009, McCarty “commenced a scheme to remove Ms. Gomez in a manner that would not reflect adversely upon either yourself or your office.” The letter adds that McCarty “made clear” to Gomez that the assistant was “required to take and would have either the position of Secretary of the Department of Community Services and Recreation or the position of Senior Clerk in the Department of Finance/Administration.” According to the letter, Gomez was “offered either position without limitation” and with promises that it was “within [McCarty’s] ability as First Selectman to ensure Ms. Gomez could have either position.”

“Having no other options,” the letter claims, Gomez chose the position of Secretary of the Department of Community Services and Recreation “in reliance upon [McCarty’s] statements.”

However, the letter claims, Gomez was neither offered or received either position previously put before her. The letter adds that Gomez’s chosen position was instead granted to Janet D’Amore, daughter of Democratic Town Committee Chairman Peter Criscuolo, even though the letter claims that D’Amore “was not an internal candidate.” The letter also claims that D’Amore “possessed no relevant past skill for the position.”

With the two positions gone, and, as the letter claims, as part of McCarty’s scheme to remove Gomez from her staff, the assistant was “required to apply for positions in Town Hall for which she clearly had little background.” Additionally, the letter claims that McCarty acted while “refusing to hold any reasonable conversation with Ms. Gomez concerning her future” and “further rescinded [McCarty’s] absolute promise to ensure Ms. Gomez would obtain a position in Town Hall.”

The letter claims that McCarty’s actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states in part, “It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer… to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race…” If the situation is not corrected, Axelrod stated, his office will serve Gomez’s rights through the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities.

Axelrod believed that McCarty took race into consideration while handling Gomez’s situation. “The present position she occupies is in part due to her race,” he said, “to present an Afro-American presence to the constituency. She was told so after she was hired.” Thus, according to the letter’s logic, McCarty allegedly exercised great caution in the roundabout removal of a person placed in her office partly because of her race, so that the minority’s exit would not reflect poorly on McCarty - hence the Civil Rights Act violation.

“I think that the letter is full of false statements,” McCarty said in response. “And it is unfortunate.” McCarty added that she was not sure where the matter would go from here.

Axelrod said that McCarty also made statements towards Gomez that were “race related.” Axelrod said that he would not have taken the case had he not thought it to be valid, adding that he and his staff interviewed Gomez several times for several hours on the matter before filing the letter.

Axelrod added that the letter was intended as a means to avoid litigation, and was sent only to McCarty. The letter was then made public by the town legal staff. Soon afterwards, the matter became public knowledge and, according to Axelrod, Gomez came to incur further abuse at Town Hall.

“It has been elevated by the First Selectman’s office into something we all wanted to avoid,” Axelrod said.

“We are treating this very seriously,” Axelrod added. “And we hope the First Selectman also treats it seriously. It is a matter which we are trying to bring to resolution without creating an embarrassing situation for anybody.”