Darlington Man Lawsuit Against City of Darlington

Former City of Darlington employee, William McMillian, filed a lawsuit on the grounds of violation of policies and racial discrimination. According to court documents attorneys for McMillian filed the suit two weeks ago in federal court stating the city violated the Family and Medical Leave Act 29 U.S.C. § 2611(2)(a)(i)(ii) (FMLA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, 12112(b), as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act ("ADAAA"), Pub. L. No. 110-325, §8; 122 Stat. 3553 (Sept. 25, 2008) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e et seq. (“Title VII”).

"Defendant, through City Administration and Supervision, failed to properly provide FMLA job protection and retaliated against Plaintiff for taking FMLA qualifying leave. Defendant treated Plaintiff differently because of his race and perceived disability and retaliated against Plaintiff after he objected to discriminatory treatment."

An excerpt from the suit reads:

“Plaintiff began his employment with The City of Darlington as a Maintenance

Technician most recently in 2011. Plaintiff was working satisfactorily with no history of significant discipline.”

"Plaintiff was certified as a Treatment Plant Operator and Biological Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator. Before taking medical leave, Plaintiff was performing satisfactorily. Plaintiff made attempts to return to work approximately September 20, 2021, after a 6 month medical leave. He returned to work with no restrictions.

"Defendants initially delayed or denied Plaintiff’s return to work but eventually allowed him to return.

"Upon his return to work after medical leave, Defendant stripped Plaintiff of his initial job duties working in wastewater management and never cross-trained Plaintiff in any other similar area.

"Upon his return to work after medical leave, Defendant refused to allow Plaintiff to drive a city vehicle or operate a lawn mower, despite Plaintiff having no medical restrictions that required such refusal.

"Upon his return to work after medical leave, Defendant refused to allow Plaintiff proper opportunity for lunch and restroom breaks.

"Upon his return to work after medical leave, Defendant subjected Plaintiff to labor intensive and difficult and/or dangerous tasks.

"Plaintiff is aware of Caucasian employees who had not been on medical leave, who worked through temp agencies who were allowed access to city vehicles, assigned Plaintiff’s old job duties, and allowed to listen to music with racial slurs and have firearms in the vehicle while working.

"Plaintiff was subjected to unequal job tasks, inequality in the terms and conditions of employment, and heightened scrutiny by City Administration and Management.

"When Plaintiff confronted management about being treated in an unequal manner, Defendant accused Plaintiff of being aggressive and terminated Plaintiff on November 10, 2021.

"Plaintiff attempted to grieve the termination, but a grievance committee was not established by Defendant until approximately March 2022.

"Defendant’s conduct Defendant failed to engage in any FMLA inquiry or accommodation for Plaintiff and failed to provide Plaintiff job protection in relation to his 2021 medical leave. Defendant retaliated and interfered with Plaintiff’s right to FMLA job protection; and Defendant further retaliated against Plaintiff for requesting a fair return to work after medical leave, requesting equal treatment and complaining about unequal treatment.

"Once his medical illness resolved, Plaintiff was willing to work, and could work in his original position that he earned before his absence.

"Defendant’s conduct toward Plaintiff materially changed Plaintiff’s work conditions, thus ultimately causing his discharge.