Free Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 121.0 kB
Pages: 11
Date: June 9, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 1,793 Words, 11,702 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22903/33-3.pdf

Download Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 121.0 kB)


Preview Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT LISA TILUM Plaintiff VS. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: Defendant CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:03CV973 (DJS)

August 22, 2003

DEFENDANT'S REPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE AND PRODUCTION The Plaintiff in the above-captioned action hereby requests, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Sections 33 and 34 and Local Rule 39, that the Defendant answer under oath the following requests for disclosure and production and file amended answers to the date of trial as additional information is discovered.

Exhibit 1

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 2 of 11

BY WAY OF INTERROGATORIES:

1. Identify the name, gender and starting salary of every employee hired as Engineering Intern, Associate Engineer or other position in the Engineering Series by DOT from 1987-1992.
ANSWER:

OBJECTION. The defendant objects to interrogatory NO.1 on the ground that it is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and seeks information that is timebarred under Title VII. As set forth in the attached affidavit from Margo Kilbon, Affirmative Action Program Coordinator for the State Department of Transportation, the Agency's computerized program for such information does not extend that far back in history for the period encompassed in this interrogatory (back to 1987 to 1992) and the Agency does not have personnel to compile this information by hand. (See, attached affidavit, Margo Kilbon, dated August 12, 2003).

2. From 1989 through 1995, state whether there existed any differences in skill, effort ,and responsibility in the job(s) performed by Lisa Tilum and the jobs performed by Ken Fargnoli, and whether or not there existed any difference in their working conditions. If so, identify such differences.
ANSWER:

Lisa Tilum was hired as an Engineer Intern 3/27/89 in the Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations. This is an entry-level trainee position She was laid off from 5/30/91 - 7/31/92 for a total of 1 year 2 months. She was promoted to a Transportation Eng. 1 in her career progression 2/4/94 On 1/20/95 she was promoted to a Trans. Eng. 3 Admin., a position in the Bureau of Public 2

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 3 of 11

Transportation. She bypassed the normal career progression title of Trans. Eng. 2. Her duties include liaison responsibility for DOT owned bus garages. Current project sizes are $50 million and $30 million. Kenneth Fargnoli was hired at the level of Trans. Sup. Engineer Construction in the Bureau of Engineering and Highway operations from an open competitive examination list; promoted to Trans. Eng. Construction 3/2/92; title change to Trans. Principal Eng. 9/16/94. Duties 1989-90 District liaison for District 3 reviewing construction problems, reviewing change orders, time extensions; 1991 assistant to Trans. Principal Eng. Responsible for claims, analyzing and resolving claims. As Trans. Principal Eng. involved in and in principal charge of resolution of all construction claims against DOT.
Supervised 4-6 staff from 1991 - present.

As to "working conditions," defendant is unclear as to what plaintiff specifically refers to, but based on a general understanding of the term, there is no difference in working conditions. 3. From 1989 through the present date, state whether there exist(ed) any differences in skill, effort and responsibility in the jobs performed by Lisa Tilum and the jobs performed by:
GENERAL ANSWER:

The differences in skill, effort, and responsibility between plaintiff and the individuals listed in this interrogatory are reflected in their respective job duties and functional specialization set forth specifically below. a. Robert Scotti

3

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 4 of 11

ANSWER:

See list of duties for Lisa Tilum in #2. Robert Scotti was hired 12/9/74 as an Eng. Intern in the Bureau of Eng. and Highway Ops.; progressed through the career series and transferred to the Bureau of Public Trans. in 9/21/79; promoted to Trans. Assoc. Eng. 8/14/84 (equivalent to Tr. Sup. Eng. Const. which became his title). He managed facility projects 1998 - 6/1/101 when he retired. He was liaison for building of CT Transit facility and in charge of ADA upgrades at all stations. After his retirement his position was not refilled at the level but was filled by a transfer of a Trans. Eng. 3. He was promoted to the level of Tr. Sup. Eng. prior to Lisa even being hired.

b. Dennis Murphy
ANSWER:

Dennis Murphy was hired as a Highway Eng. in training 6/23/72 and promoted through the career series in the Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations until 6/19/87 when he was promoted and transferred to the Bureau of Public Transportation as Trans. Assoc. Eng. (title changed to Trans. Sup. Eng. 1998). He is responsible for major projects - Peck Bridge $125 million, and Stamford Center Island project $100 million. He currently supervises staff including Lisa Tilum.

c. Lev Laber

4

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 5 of 11

ANSWER:

Lev Laber was hired 12/6/85 as Trans. Assoc. Eng. Bridge Design (title change 1998 Trans. Sup. Eng. Bridge) in the Bureau of Public Transportation from an open competitive examination list. He is responsible for the Bureau's entire bridge program, approx. 350 bridges and supervised staff for the past 2 years. d. Fred Chojnicki
ANSWER:

Fred Chojnicki was hired 8/21/81 as a Connecticut Career Trainee; promoted to his target class of Trans. Planner 1 9/3/82; promoted Trans. Planner 2 5/25/84; Trans. Rail Officer 4/8/88; Trans. Rail Officer 2 Const. 4/8/88; and Trans. Sup. Rail Officer 5/4/90. He is responsible for the catenary system, directly responsible not liaison for project consultant on $175 million project. Has supervised staff during this time, currently does not. e. Alan Mancini
ANSWER:

Alan Mancini was hired 2/14/64 as a Highway Engineer in training in the Bureau of Eng. and Highway Operations; progressed through his career and transferred to the Bureau of Planning; promoted from Tr. Planner 2 to Tr. Sup. Rail Officer 1/1/95. He transferred to the Bureau of Public Transportation 6/5/98 where he worked until he retired 3/31/03. He was responsible for facilities such as diesel shop in New Haven, Stamford maintenance facility. He supervised staff in past year. f. Stanley Hodyl 5

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 6 of 11

ANSWER:

Stanley Hodyl was hired as Highway Eng. in training 9/9/66 and progressed in career path until he resigned as Trans. Eng. 1 12/1/78. He was rehired 9/28/84 as Trans. Eng. in training in the Bureau of Planning; promoted to Trans. Jr. Eng. (Trans. Eng. 1 title change) 3/29/85; promoted Trans. Planner 2 3/28/86; transferred to Commissioner's Office 7/24/92 in the Consultant selection unit; promoted Trans. Eng. 3 Admin. 12/24/93; promoted Trans. Sup. Eng. Admin. 96/02; retired 5/31.03. He managed the departments process of selection of all consultants contracted by the DOT. His supervisor (managerial level position) was reassigned to oversee the Bradley International expansion project and he independently was responsible for the full range of functions of the legislatively mandated (Conn. Gen. Stat. ยงยง 13b-20b through 13b-20k). Consultant selection process. This is in excess of $100 million of contract fees. This is a unique position in the Department and the Department of Administrative Services approved this level of position.

g. Charles Roman
ANSWER:

Charles Roman was hired as Cooperative Education Intern 6/24/88 in the Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations; promoted to Engineer Intern 1/3/90; promoted to Tr. Eng. 1 1/26/90; promoted Tr. Eng. 2 9/6/91; promoted Tr. Eng. 3 Traffic 9/3/93; transferred to Office of Fiscal/Special projects 12/6/96; 9/24/99 transferred to Chief Engineers Office; promoted Tr. Sup. Eng. Admin. 2/11/00; promoted Fiscal Admin. Mgr. 1 7/13/01 in Office of Fiscal/Special projects. Duties from 1989 - 1996 perform engineering design and State Traffic Commission reviews; traffic engineering reviews of design plans; supervised 3 staff during this time. 12/96 - 9/99 developed, support and assist in the general administration and strategic development of DOT's annual highway program; assist and direct the scheduling an funding development of project phases. 9/99

6

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 7 of 11

- 7/01 Engineering Assistant to Chief Engineer; assist on matters involving all

aspects of the Bureau including construction, engineering, finances, maintenance and right of way. Bureau Legislative liaison; unique position in the Department with Department of Administrative Services approval for level of title. 7/01 to present assistant to Director of Office of Fiscal/Special projects.

4. If the answer to interrogatory #:J [correction: #3] is affirmative, identify any such differences.
ANSWER:

See response to Interrogatory #3. 5. From 1989 through the present date, state whether there exist(ed) any differences in working conditions in the jobs performed by Lisa Tilum and the jobs performed by:
ANSWER:

As to "working conditions," defendant is unclear as to what plaintiff specifically refers to, but based on a general understanding of the term, there is no difference in working conditions between the plaintiff and the individuals listed below. a. Robert Scotti

b. Dennis Murphy

c. Lev Laber 7

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 8 of 11

d. Fred Chojnicki

e. Alan Mancini

f. Stanley Hodyl g. Charles Roman

6. If the answer to interrogatory #'2: [correction: #5] is affirmative, identify any such differences.
ANSWER:

N/A.

7. Identify any employees in the Bureau of Public Transportation promoted to a supervising level or higher from 1994 through the present, stating for each employee, name, promotion and date of promotion.
ANSWER:

See attached list. 8

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 9 of 11

8. Identify those who participated in the decision to replace the Supervising Engineering position held by Robert Scotti with the Engineer 3 position held by Rodney Armstrong and an additional position of Engineering Intern, an action which occurred in approximately 2001.
ANSWER:

Harry Harris, Transportation Public Transit Administrator, and Mark Neri, Transportation Public Transit Assistant Administrator. 9. Identify the person(s) responsible for assigning the new Engineering Intern hire to Jay Young, Engineer 3, for supervision.
ANSWER:

Harry Harris, Mark Neri, Jayantha Mather, principal Engineer. 10. Identify any changes in job titles in the engineering series, planning series and the rail officer series from 1990 through the present date.
ANSWER:

Information requested from Department of Administrative Services, the state agency responsible for all job classifications, thus, investigation continues.

9

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 10 of 11

11. Identify any Bureau of Public Transportation employees who have taken the Department=s Leadership course from 1989 through the present date.
ANSWER: See attached list.

12. State which of the individuals, if any, listed in response to Interrogatory #9 [correction: #11], received promotions after taking the Department=s Leadership course, and for each, identify that promotion by job title and date.
ANSWER:

Maureen Kent, Transportation Supervising Planner 4/8/02.

10

Case 3:03-cv-00973-DJS

Document 33-3

Filed 06/10/2004

Page 11 of 11

25