SCRANTON – A Scranton police officer contends that, despite having an exemplary service record, he was passed over for numerous promotions in favor of younger officers, in violation of both federal and state law.
Larry Greenfield of Scranton filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on April 22 versus The City of Scranton.
“The plaintiff, Larry Greenfield, was born Dec. 1, 1972 and was at all relevant times over the age of 40. In February 2004, the plaintiff began working for the City of Scranton as a full-time police officer. During the plaintiff’s tenure as a police officer for the defendant, the plaintiff performed his work in an exemplary fashion,” the suit says.
“Beginning in December 2022, the plaintiff took the civil service test for the Detective position and for the Crime Scene Investigator position. The plaintiff scored second in the Civil Service test for the Detective position and Crime Scene Investigator position, of all individuals taking the Civil Service test. For the Detective position, Officer Francis McLane was number one on the test followed by the plaintiff, an opening for the Detective position was filled by Officer McLane and the plaintiff became the number one position on the Civil Service Test.”
The suit adds that the plaintiff, “now being in the number one spot for the next detective position, expected based upon his score and exemplary career to be selected for the next opening.”
“However, plaintiff was passed over and the number three scorer Melissa Forsett was selected, who was seven years younger than the plaintiff. After the number three scorer of the Civil Service Exam was selected for Detective, the plaintiff was still number one on the list. However, when another position in the Detective department opened, the number four scorer Kyle Gilmartin was selected, who was substantially younger than the plaintiff. In regard to the Crime Scene Investigator position, the plaintiff was the number two scorer and when a position opened in that area, Officer Paul Tomczyk was selected and the plaintiff moved to the number one scorer,” the suit states.
“The plaintiff, now in the number one spot for Crime Scene Investigator position, expected based upon his score and his exemplary career to be selected, however, Officer William Turner, a much younger officer, was selected. Then again, the plaintiff fully expected to be selected for the next spot as a Crime Scene investigator, however he again was passed over for a younger police officer. The plaintiff at this point asked Scranton Police Chief Thomas Carroll of why he was being passed over for these promotions, Chief Carroll responded, ‘It's becoming a younger department.’ At that point in time, the plaintiff was 50 years old.”
For counts of violating the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, the plaintiff is seeking permanent injunctive relief against further violations of those laws, back pay, front pay, salary, pay increases, bonuses, medical and other benefits, training, promotions, pensions and seniority, actual damages, costs, expenses, attorney’s fees and additional injunctive relief to protect against retaliation.
The plaintiff is represented by Michael R. Goffer of the Law Office of Goffer & Cimini, in Scranton.
The defendant has not yet retained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case 3:24-cv-00682
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com