Burke v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York

Background

Trevor Burke worked for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. as a Mechanic B beginning in 2014 and became a Mechanic A in 2018. The Mechanic A position was later renamed Gas Troubleshooter. The job included emergency gas work, meter work, and inspections, and required physically demanding tasks such as lifting, pushing, pulling, and carrying objects weighing up to 50 pounds or more.

Burke was injured in a September 2020 motor vehicle accident and later experienced an aortic aneurysm and descending aortic dissection. He was absent from work and received long-term disability benefits. In September 2021, his doctors imposed restrictions limiting his lifting, pushing, and pulling. Con Edison’s system showed him as terminated after his leave period ended, although the parties disputed whether that entry reflected an actual termination or a clerical error. Con Edison’s Accommodation Review Committee later identified three clerical positions consistent with his restrictions, but Burke declined to take the required tests after concluding that he had already been terminated and that the testing process did not properly protect his employment rights.

Claims and Legal Analysis

Burke asserted disability-discrimination and failure-to-accommodate claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). He also asserted race and color discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL.

The court held that Burke was not qualified for the Gas Troubleshooter position under the ADA because lifting, pushing, and pulling up to 50 pounds were essential functions of that job, and his restrictions limited him to lifting, pushing, or pulling no more than 20 or 25 pounds. The court rejected his proposal that Con Edison assign him a partner to perform the heavy work because an accommodation cannot eliminate an essential job function. The court therefore dismissed his ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL claims based on failure to return him to the Gas Troubleshooter position.

The court reached a different result on the failure-to-accommodate claims. Con Edison’s C-6 program gave employees with permanent medical restrictions six months to train for a clerical or administrative position on company time and at their regular pay. The court found evidence from which a jury could conclude that Burke was eligible for that program, that Con Edison failed to clearly communicate his employment status and the accommodation review process, and that the offer to test for clerical positions on short notice and without pay or benefits was not a reasonable accommodation. The ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL failure-to-accommodate claims therefore survived summary judgment.

The court dismissed Burke’s race and color discrimination claims. Burke relied on the treatment of a white coworker, but the court found that the coworker worked in a different specialty, had different medical restrictions, and maintained qualifications that Burke did not. The court concluded that the coworker was not similarly situated in all material respects and that Burke had presented no evidence that the challenged treatment was because of his race or color.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Con Edison’s motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment was granted on Burke’s ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL claims based on failure to return him to the Gas Troubleshooter position, and on his Title VII, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL race-discrimination claims; those claims were dismissed. Summary judgment was denied on his ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL claims based on failure to accommodate him in a clerical position, which may proceed to trial. The court also directed the parties to provide trial availability and scheduled a case-management conference.