Unit 4 settles former worker's lawsuit for $75,000

Unit 4 settles former worker's lawsuit for $75,000

CHAMPAIGN — Just before winter break, the Champaign school board approved a $75,000 settlement agreement with a former employee who filed a federal lawsuit against the district claiming discrimination and violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Scott Christenson had been an employee with Unit 4 for 18 years, working in the transportation department as a bus driver and, at the time of his termination, as a teacher aide and hall monitor at Central High School.

The school board formally approved his firing in March, after months of disciplinary meetings between Christenson and the human-resources department over excessive absences.

During his tenure at Central — nearly three years — Christenson missed a total of 155 days of work, according to district documents.

Christenson was given the job as a hall monitor and teacher aide at Central in 2013, after the district determined he was unfit to work as a bus driver upon his return from a two-month leave of absence for a medical condition, according to a complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Urbana in March 2014.

The complaint states Christenson suffers from a disability called Addison's disease, a rare but treatable condition that occurs when the body produces insufficient amounts of certain hormones. It did not prohibit him from driving a bus. While employed by Unit 4, he also underwent a total knee replacement and back surgery and had other health issues.

Despite being medically cleared by his physician when he returned to work in February 2013, Unit 4 subjected Christenson to an independent medical examination, which determined he was "fully and permanently disabled" for his purpose of being a bus driver.

"The (independent) physician did not point to any one specific medical condition which caused the plaintiff to be unfit for duty, however ambiguously determined the 'totality' of the plaintiff's medical conditions caused him to be unfit to drive a bus for the district," the lawsuit stated.

The complaint also alleged the school district engaged in "hostile and discriminatory" conduct toward Christenson throughout the course of his employment with Unit 4. The suit, filed by Urbana attorney Ronald Langacker, asked that Christenson be given back his job as a bus driver, that the district declare its fault, and that Christenson be awarded damages to compensate for the "economic loss" suffered as a result of the job change, as well as funds for his attorney fees.

Despite the pending lawsuit, Christenson remained a Unit 4 employee for two more years. In March 2015, he received a "last chance" warning from Ken Kleber, Unit 4's director of human resources, which outlined a variety of issues with Christenson's "excessive" absences. He was disciplined for taking time off work beyond his accrued leave days and lacking proper documentation related to his hospitalization in another state that kept him away from work for weeks, according to letters obtained from Unit 4.

In the March 2015 memo, Kleber asked Christenson to arrive on time and remain at work for all of his scheduled shifts, not be absent unless he was using accrued leave time, give proper documentation to the district if he misses work for medical reasons and conduct himself in "a cooperative and non-argumentative manner" during interactions with district employees.

Then, in December 2015, Christenson received another memo from Kleber that outlined his work absences over the past three school years and recommended his termination. The memo cited 61 days missed in 2013-14, 59 days in 2014-15 and 35 days by the time of the December meeting in the 2015-16 school year, including a leave of absence that lasted for "almost the entire month of November," Kleber wrote.

The letter notified Christenson that he had been placed on paid administrative leave while the termination process proceeded.

"Since you have been an employee at Central High School, we have been very understanding and accommodating of your absences," Kleber wrote. "We need a regular employee, not a substitute, in order to provide a safe, supportive and educationally appropriate environment in our school. It is simply too burdensome on the building and other employees when you are not here."

Later that month, Christenson appealed the firing, calling the action "unfounded" and saying the district's actions are "against the letter of the collective bargaining agreement and are being done (as) an act of discrimination toward me," according to a letter he sent to human resources.

In January 2016, Christenson was informed that Unit 4's administration would uphold the recommendation for termination. In response, he requested a formal hearing before the board of education, according to district documents.

A hearing was set for Feb. 22, which Christenson could not attend because he was in the hospital.

On March 14, the board formally voted in favor of firing Christenson. Nine days later, the Champaign Educational Support Professionals union filed a demand to arbitrate the case.

In June 2016, the district court in Urbana dismissed Christenson's lawsuit, which he appealed a month later. Christenson also filed charges with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, and a notice of right to sue was issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in November.

At its Dec. 19 meeting, the school board approved the settlement agreement between Christenson, the CESP union and the district, awarding $50,000 to Christenson and $25,000 to his attorney. As part of the agreement, Christenson cannot sue the district, seek re-employment with Unit 4 or talk about the case. Neither Langacker nor Christenson would comment on the settlement.

As part of the agreement, Unit 4 admits no fault. Its insurance provider, Massachusetts Bay Insurance, will cover $40,000 of the settlement, with the remainder coming out of the district's tort fund, according to Tom Lockman, Unit 4's chief financial and legal officer.

Lockman and district spokesperson Stephanie Stuart would not comment on the settlement, which Stuart said concludes a case that has been ongoing for "about 10 years with this individual."

Said Lockman: "What the district focuses on is an effective use of resources in determining how to proceed in matters like this, and we believe we've done that here."

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

CommonSenseless wrote on January 06, 2017 at 11:01 am

Let's see. Guy has medical issue not caused by his work at school district. Guy misses a bunch of work on a regular basis. Guy not reliable to show up when schedules are important. His doctor says he is fine, schools doctor says no. Gets a different job doing "hall monitor". Translation: We wanted to fire you for being an unreliable bus driver, but union prevents that. Still can't be reliable in job that school doesn't really need anyway, union fights for him still. Yeah unions are a great thing.....

Employment is not a right! Public sector unions need to go away or find a way to separate the good from the bad. Why do tax payers need to pay this guy for a job that isn't needed, because he can't reliably do the job he was hired for?

Concerned_Citizen wrote on January 06, 2017 at 11:01 am

Isn't this the second strike against the school district? The school district is already facing a lawsuit for discrimination and retaliation. How many more times will this happen before we can call it a pattern?

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2016-03-26/unit-4-aide-sues-over-...

Mastadon-27 wrote on January 06, 2017 at 4:01 pm

There have been a lot more than two cases.  Many have been settled without the taxpayer's knowledge.  Had they been public knowledge, IMHO, the referendum would likley not have passed.  The administrators don't particularly care about the welfare or health of their employees.  All of the CESP and CFT employees are union.  The only non-union employees are administrators.

C-U townie2 wrote on January 06, 2017 at 2:01 pm

I'm guessing that you have never been to Central High School, not only are hall monitors needed, but they are an important piece of keeping the school safe.  I beg you to apply for the position, you will see its not as easy as it may sound.  

CommonSenseless wrote on January 06, 2017 at 2:01 pm

So if the halls are that bad, what would this guy be able to do? He has had a knee replacement and back surgery. It doesn't sound like this guy is at 100%.  From what you are saying, we need more police officers posted in the schools. What a sad state for Champaign schools.

Mastadon-27 wrote on January 06, 2017 at 3:01 pm

I worked in Central for two years, before and after the district requested an SRO full time in the building. It's that bad.  And for your education, Addison's disease is a life threatening condition, which can cause death.  Stop commenting if you're not going to research before doing so. 

http://www.webmd.com/cancer/tc/addisons-disease-topic-overview#1

CommonSenseless wrote on January 06, 2017 at 4:01 pm

A few things...... If the conditions are as bad as you say, how about we get a little tougher on the problem element? Maybe a couple more SROs and not retaining union charity cases. Without including Addison's, the article had 2 additional reasons why this guy would do no good during an altercation. The Addison's is just another reason why maybe this guy should not be employed by the school at all. Why is it the tax payers responsibility to pay for this guy? Employment is not a right. Oh and give yourself a pat on the back for researching Addison's on WebMD......stupidity is also life threatening so you might want to get that checked out.

Mastadon-27 wrote on January 06, 2017 at 11:01 pm

"Maybe a couple more SROs and not retaining union charity cases." 

I'm assuming you are a non-union sympathizer, judging from this statement.  Hall monitors aren't allowed to intervene in altercations, as is stated in the CESP contract, to do so would be grounds for dismissal.  The district determined, as it often has in many past cases, that the Addison's disease, in the plaintff's case, prevented him from safely performing his duties as a bus driver. 

"Despite being medically cleared by his physician when he returned to work in February 2013, Unit 4 subjected Christenson to an independent medical examination, which determined he was "fully and permanently disabled" for his purpose of being a bus driver."  The district has a history of "second guessing" physicians they refer employees to,when it doesn't suit their agenda.  Thus the BOE's decision to settle the lawsuit prior to a trial.

"The (independent) physician did not point to any one specific medical condition which caused the plaintiff to be unfit for duty, however ambiguously determined the 'totality' of the plaintiff's medical conditions caused him to be unfit to drive a bus for the district," the lawsuit stated.  The independent medical examiner is employed by the distirct's insurer to give an opinion in favor of the insurer to avoid having to payout plaintiff claims, if at all possible. 

All bus drivers have to renew licenses, have physicals and have refresher training on a schedule determined by the Secretary Of State's office.   The plaintiff did this satisfactorily for 18 years, according to the district's records.  Apparently, Addison's disease isn't considered by the Secretary Of State's office as a condition to revoke the plaintiff's credentials.

"In June 2016, the district court in Urbana dismissed Christenson's lawsuit, which he appealed a month later. Christenson also filed charges with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, and a notice of right to sue was issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in November."

"Employment is not a right."  In this particular instance it's a contractual agreement, as recognized by the BOE.  Your bias is showing.

 

 

Objective Reporter wrote on January 06, 2017 at 2:01 pm

How is this strike two against the district?  Sounds to me like it's strikes 1, 2, and 3 against a lazy employee sucking off the teet of the district.

Mastadon-27 wrote on January 06, 2017 at 3:01 pm

Medical condition as noted in the article:

http://www.webmd.com/cancer/tc/addisons-disease-topic-overview#1

You need to research before making comments that show your ignorance.