CBIA Taps Jackson Lewis to Write Friend of Court Brief on Unsettled Employment Law Issues

The Connecticut Business and Industry Association asked Jackson Lewis to prepare a "friend of the court" brief to the Connecticut Supreme Court addressing two employment law issues dividing Connecticut's lower courts. Perodeau v. City of Hartford, S.C. No. 16468 (2001). First, the court will consider whether municipal employees and/or supervisors can be found individually liable for discriminatory employment practices under the Connecticut Human Rights and Opportunities Act (Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-60(a)(1). The Act prohibits an "employer, by himself or his agent" from discriminating in its employment practices. Courts have differed when interpreting the term "employer." Some have concluded that individual supervisors are themselves "employers" subject to personal liability. The CBIA will argue that the supervisors should not be held individually liable under the CHRO Act.

Secondly, the court will consider whether an individual may assert a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress arising out of employment decisions other than termination. A claim by a police officer against several Hartford police department supervisors led Judge Alan Nevas of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut to ask the court to rule on these issues. While the case involves municipal employees, the court's analysis likely will impact private employers throughout Connecticut.

Courts also are divided on whether emotional distress claims are limited to mental injuries arising from the termination of employment, or if actions taken during the course of continuing employment could also serve as the basis for a claim. While the court has allowed a cause of action for emotional distress damages arising from a termination, Parsons v. United Technologies Corp., 243 Conn. 66 (1997), the court has not specified whether demotions, negative performance evaluations, or reductions in compensation that occur during the employment relationship can support such a claim. The CBIA is attempting to persuade the court to limit such claims to incidents arising in connection with a termination.