Judge Nicholas Garaufis
The court was called on to decide issues over relief owed victims of New York City’s discriminatory entry-level firefighter exam. Among other things, it ruled the City could seek to prove that substantially equivalent employmentin the form of firefighter positions with similar pay, benefits and schedulingexisted within a reasonable geographic distance of an individual non-hire claimant’s home. However, the City could not offer evidence of other government positions as substantially similar positions. In so doing the court rejected the City’s position that the individual claimants could have found substantially equivalent employment within the New York Police Department. Citing Ford Motor Co. v. EEOC, the court concluded that the jobs of a firefighter and police officerboth of which are peace officers under New York lawwere very dissimilar in job responsibilities and working conditions, and thus constituted dissimilar employment as a matter of law. Further, a firefighter’s unique schedule renders a police officer position dissimilar employment. The court also barred the City from seeking discovery designed to provide evidence that a particular claimant was likely to have left the fire department had he or she been hired.
