U.S. v. City of New York

No. 02-6102 (L); 02-6112, 02-6122, 02-6124, 02-6126, 02-7405 (2d Cir. Feb. 13, 2004) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55534

Description

Mandatory Work Program Participants Are Employees for Purposes of Title VII, Second Circuit Says

Abstract

The Second Circuit held that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, requiring participation in certain work activities as a condition of receiving welfare benefits, did not intend to deny participants their civil rights protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The United States, on behalf of four participants in New York City’s Work Experience Program, a mandatory welfare work program, alleged in a suit against New York City, the New York City Housing Authority, and certain city officials that the participants suffered sexual and racial harassment in violation of Title VII. Finding that plaintiffs were not employees within the meaning of Title VII, the district court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs appealed. Reversing the district court and remanding to it, the Second Circuit concluded, after a functional, commonsense assessment of plaintiffs’ relationship with defendants, that plaintiffs were employees—a conclusion consistent with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s interpretations of Title VII. The Second Circuit noted that plaintiffs received cash payments and food stamps in return for their work for City, that those payments equaled the minimum wage times the number of hours plaintiffs worked, and that a plaintiff who unjustifiably refused to work would lose the portion of the family’s grant attributable to her. Neither Section 608(d) or 617 of the welfare law nor the law’s legislative history, the Second Circuit said, evinced Congress’ intent to preempt Title VII’s protection provisions. The Second Circuit added that both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Labor issued implementing regulations suggesting no preemption. The Second Circuit ruled that plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded their status as employees entitled to Title VII’s protection provisions and that the welfare law did not preempt Title VII with respect to Work Experience Program participants.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2004-02-13 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: