SACO — The Maine Human Rights Commission voted unanimously in February that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the City of Saco discriminated against its former Economic Development Director William Mann on the basis of age and/or sex.

The next step in the process is conciliation with those involved — Mann, the City of Saco and MHRC – coming together to attempt to remedy the situation.

Mann was employed by the city starting in December 2014 until February 2018, when he was discharged by Kevin Sutherland, the city administrator at the time. Sutherland began his tenure with the city in September, 2015, about 10 months after Mann arrived.

According to a report by MHRC investigator Alice A. Neal, Mann claimed that co-workers and others told him that Sutherland didn’t want the city’s next Comprehensive Plan to be “written by a bunch of old white guys.” Mann further claimed that Sutherland made additional age-based statements, stating a preference for employing younger individuals, and that the city mainly hired only younger women during his tenure. Mann said every permanent non-probationary employee discharged between 2017 and 2018 was male, and most were over 50. He told investigators that he believes he was discharged based on his age and sex, according to the report.

Information provided by the city to investigators showed Mann had strengths in his role, but apparently didn’t get along with Sutherland and the management team and his performance was said to be lacking. The report notes attempts were made to correct Mann’s behavior, but it didn’t change, and Sutherland ultimately determined the city and Mann should part ways. The city’s response noted that none of Sutherland’s statements were made directly to or about Mann. The city said Mann’s discharge was not made on the basis of age or sex.

According to the investigator’s report, Sutherland talked about wanting to make Saco a more diverse community, to make the city appealing to millennials and “hipsters,” and disagreed with a prior Comprehensive Plan, which included a senior living housing project. Sutherland stated the prior city administrator wanted to focus on Saco as a retirement community but he believed if that were to happen, Saco would “die on the vine.” Sutherland’s vision, the report stated, was a vibrant community with housing to accommodate everyone. Sutherland noted that the last comprehensive plans were written by a “bunch of old white guys,” and he wanted the next to reflect the more diverse community, the report stated, and went on to say that Sutherland didn’t have a problem with Mann working on the plan.

There were reprimands for Mann being late with materials intended for the City Council, not meeting Sutherland’s priorities and going over Sutherland’s head to discuss another employee with members of the City Council.

Mann and another employee, both older men, were passed over for attending a leadership training program in 2017, the report states, to allow more junior staffers to attend.

Neal wrote that Sutherland told Mann in December 2017 that he expected his two-week notice by the end of January 2018; on Feb. 22, he was discharged.

The report noted that nine people were discharged between 2017 and 2018; three during their probation, including one woman. The remaining six were men with an average age of 51 1/2 years old.

Neal wrote that Sutherland’s statements about “old white guys,” millennials and “hipsters’ all stated a preference based on age and/or sex. The city did not refute that the statements were made, Neal wrote, but that they were taken out of context.

The city asserted Sutherland’s statements were not direct evidence or statements made directly to Mann, and that he was discharged over performance issues.

“Given Sutherland’s statements and the respondent’s records reflecting that older men were discharged from employment, the record does not support a finding that respondent carries its burden of establishing that it would have taken the same action absent Sutherland’s stated bias,” Neal wrote in the report.

Mann did not respond to an email seeking comment.

“Because this is a still a pending matter at the MHRC, on advice of our counsel I am not allowed to comment,” said Bryan Kaenrath, Saco’s City Administrator since January 2020.

MHRC Executive Director Amy Sneirson said there are three parties at the table during a conciliation following a reasonable ground finding: the complainant, the respondent and the Commission.

“Under the MHRA, the complainant can pursue a set of remedies for unlawful discrimination — including things like damages, attorney’s fees, back pay, etc. — and the Commission can pursue a set of remedies for unlawful discrimination — civil penalty, injunctive relief, etc. – and the relief sought by each may not be the same,” Sneirson explained in an email. “A complainant who is no longer employed might seek damages or back pay or the like as a remedy. The Commission is not seeking those things, but might seek for the respondent to change its policies and train its staff to avoid similar behavior in the future. An agreement reached via conciliation typically includes all three parties. In fact, Section 2.09(C) of the Commission’s procedural rule says that the Commission will not settle separately with the respondent at conciliation unless we determine that the complainant refused a reasonable settlement offer.”

If a matter cannot be settled, a civil action may be filed in Superior Court, according to the Maine Human Rights Commission website.

Copy the Story Link

Comments are not available on this story.

« Previous

More school days for Saco PreK-8 students starting April 5

Next »

Maine State Bar Association announces 2021 Law Day contests