Sparveri v. Town of Rocky Hill

• Decision Date: 04 September 2009
• Docket Number: No. 3:05cv00376(WIG).,3:05cv00376(WIG).
• Citation: 656 F.Supp.2d 297
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
• Parties: Gloria SPARVERI, Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF ROCKY HILL, Defendant.

Page 297

656 F.Supp.2d 297

Gloria SPARVERI, Plaintiff, v.TOWN OF ROCKY HILL, Defendant.

No. 3:05cv00376(WIG).

United States District Court, D. Connecticut.

September 4, 2009.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Thomas G. Moukawsher, Moukawsher & Walsh, Hartford, CT, for Plaintiff.

Morris R. Borea, Robbie T. Gerrick, Rome McGuigan Sabanosh, Hartford, CT, for Defendant.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

WILLIAM I. GARFINKEL, United States Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff, Gloria Sparveri, has brought this action against her former employer, the Town of Rocky Hill, alleging that the Town breached the terms of its Pension Plan when it refused to calculate her pension benefits based upon a hire date that had been adjusted by the Town Manager to account for her part-time and volunteer service to the Town.The Town denies that she is entitled to additional pension benefits based upon this adjusted hire date and maintains that Plaintiff is entitled only to a lump-sum distribution of her contributions to the Pension Plan plus interest because of a settlement agreement and release that Plaintiff signed when she resigned her employment with the Town.

This matter was tried to the Court over a period of three days.After due consideration of the evidence presented, the Court hereby renders the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1.Plaintiff, Gloria Sparveri, is a 62-year old woman, who, along with her husband Anthony Sparveri, has lived in the town of Rocky Hill, Connecticut, since 1972.

2.Plaintiff received her Master's Degree in Behavioral Science in the early 1980's and is a Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor.Until the early 1990's Plaintiff worked full-time as the Executive Director of Sexual Assault Counseling Services of Middlesex County, providing counseling and advocacy services to victims of crimes, sexual abuse, and domestic violence.

3.As part of her job, in 1987, during a training session for police officers, she was approached by the Rocky Hill Police Chief, who asked her if she would be willing to provide some counseling to the mother of a murder victim in Rocky Hill.She agreed to help and soon thereafter, in August 1988, she began working on a volunteer basis with the Police Chief to start a Crisis Intervention Unit ("CIU") for Rocky Hill.Plaintiff reported to the Police Chief, whose office was on the ground floor of the old Town Hall.

4.Plaintiff's volunteer job with the Police Department gradually evolved such that she was doing significantly more work with the Police Department, and her hours of work increased substantially.Plaintiff was on-call for crisis intervention matters 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.She carried a one-way radio with her at all times so that the Police Department could reach her if she was needed to help with crisis intervention.During this time, she continued to work as the Executive Director of the Middlesex County Sexual Assault Counseling Services, which approved of her work for Rocky Hill because it involved victim services and advocacy.

5.In October 1994, Plaintiff became a part-time counselor/therapist for the Town of Rocky Hill, providing family, group and/or individual therapy, court advocacy and liaison work, and emergency and crisis intervention.Her salary was $350/week, based on a 19-hour week at the rate of $18.50 per hour.Her contract specifically provided that she would not be entitled to any health, life, or pension benefits.Her contract was signed by Town Manager O. Paul Shew and Police Chief Phillip Dunn.Her contract was renewed for a year in July 1995 and her salary increased to $360.50/week, still based on a 19-hour work week.Although her contracts were for 19 hours/week, Plaintiff often worked many more hours, probably closer to 30 hours/week on average.Plaintiff reported her hours on time sheets and received "comp time" for any hours over and above 19 hours/week.

6.On July 1, 1996, Plaintiff became a full-time employee of the Town, providing not only crisis intervention but also employee assistance ("EAP") to Town employees.Her yearly salary was $39,457.60 based upon a 40-hour work week.Her contract specifically stated that she waived any interest in health and life insurance and pension benefits, although her vacation time, sick time, and holiday time benefits were in accordance with the Town's Personnel Rules for new employees.

7.On August 8, 1997, Plaintiff received a letter from the Town Manager, Philip R. Dunn, appointing her as the official Employee Assistance Program employee, effective July 1, 1997.She was now eligible for all benefits available to full-time employees, including healthcare and pension benefits.These benefits were very important to her because her husband did not have health insurance or pension benefits, and for the first time, Plaintiff began contributing to the Pension Plan.

8.In 1999, Plaintiff was appointed as the Director of Personnel, EAP/CIU, a position created by Nicholas LaRosa, the new Town Manager.In this capacity, Plaintiff reported directly to LaRosa and had an office directly across the hall from his.Plaintiff's duties were primarily recruitment, EAP, and crisis intervention.She did not handle payroll, which was done by the Accounting Department.She also did not have any involvement with pension or retirement benefits, which were handled by the Finance Director Bob Metcalf, and later JohnMehr 9.Plaintiff had known the LaRosa family for many years as they lived in the same neighborhood.LaRosa was a former police officer and had a good understanding of the type of crisis intervention work that Plaintiff performed.He had also experienced the death of his son and related to her work because of that.LaRosa was aware of Plaintiff's work with the CIU and her volunteer service and part-time work for the Town.Plaintiff trusted LaRosa implicitly and considered him to be an honest man.

10.In connection with her work with the Town, Plaintiff came to know Barbara Gilbert, who had worked for the Town for many years.Like Plaintiff, Gilbert had worked for the Town in a part-time capacity as Clerk of the Town Council from 1974 to 2002.She also held a part-time job as a technician in the Town's Assessor's Office for a number of years.From 1985 to 1992, she worked outside the Town but still served as Clerk of the Town Council.In 1992, Gilbert became the Town Clerk, which was a full-time position.In 1999, she became Assistant Town Manager under LaRosa and then Acting Town Manager upon LaRosa's sudden death in 2002.On November 12, 2002, she was appointed by the Town Council to the position of Town Manager, a position she still holds today.At that time, she negotiated a change in her hire date to account for her 18 years of part-time employment with the Town.At the time her employment contract was signed, the Pension Plan did not recognize this amended hire date.She was told that the Plan would have to be amended to allow Participants to buy years of service.They would also have to prove their eligibility by showing that they worked for more than 20 hours a week for more than 26 weeks a year.

11.In 2000, Anthony Sparveri, Plaintiff's husband, was appointed to fill a vacancy on the Town Council.He then ran for election in 2001 and was elected for a two-year term to the Town Council, but lost his bid for re-election in 2003.While on Town Council, he served as Chairman of the Finance Committee.

12.Around September 2000, Plaintiff had conversations with both LaRosa and Gilbert about getting credit for her service with the Town before she became a full-time employee.

13.On September 8, 2000, Gilbert prepared a memorandum for LaRosa seeking to give Town employee Maureen Fazzina credit for one-third of the time that she was employed on a part-time basis, which would affect her vacation, longevity and, ultimately, retirement dates.LaRosa "OK'd" the memorandum and signed it.Fazzina testified that this agreement did not have any impact on her pension benefits and that Gilbert told her that she would have to buy into the pension to increase her pension years.¹

14.Although the evidence is in dispute as to how the memorandum concerning Plaintiff's service time came into existence,² the evidence is undisputed that on September 13, 2000, Gilbert prepared a memorandum to LaRosa, which stated as follows:

It has been brought to my attention that when Gloria Sparveri was hired as a full time employee of the Town she was not given credit for service for the time she was employed part time.This benefit has been given to other employees who started working for the Town on a part time basis until they could secure a full time position.In fairness to Gloria, I believe she should be given credit for the time she was employed part time thereby adjusting her hire date to 5/1/91.The result of this adjustment will have an effect on her vacation, longevity and ultimately retirement dates.Thank you for giving this matter consideration.

(Pl.'sEx. 1)(emphasis added).The memorandum was "OK'd" and signed by LaRosa on September 20, 2000.

15.Plaintiff understood that this change in her hire date would impact all of her benefits, including her pension, which she equated with her "retirement," although she conceded that she had no knowledge as to how the Town was going to implement the change in her retirement date.The Town did give her a longevity bonus of $500 based upon her new hire date, it increased her vacation time, and decreased the co-pay for her health insurance from 10% to 5%.³The mechanics of changing her hire date were performed by Beth Hajek in the Town's Accounting Department.

16.Plaintiff testified that this September 13, 2000, memorandum impacted her attitude and conduct toward her job.It also impacted her personal planning for her own retirement.

17.Plaintiff was of the belief that LaRosa, as the Town Manager, had the authority to change...