.
Feedback

Man Files Discrimination Suit In Termination From The Day

Former editor Edward Murphy sues New London newspaper for age and gender discrimination

Edward Murphy of Waterford worked for newspaper for almost 34 years.

He covered sports, town politics, became a copy editor and then a copy desk editor before branching off as the custom publications editor. There he created or oversaw the creation of magazines like “Grace,” “Marketplace,” “Sound and Country” and “Spaces” while continuing to run weekly sections like “Wheels” and “Home Source.”

But in April 2009, when he was 56 years old, The Day terminated his employment. At the time, the newspaper said his position was being consolidated, and The Day publisher Gary Farrugia later called it a “recession-driven decision.”

The person who replaced Murphy left in December of 2010, and The Day set out to hire a new editor of custom publications. Murphy applied, even sending the company an e-mail saying he would be willing to take less money for the same position.

He was never granted an interview. In January of 2011, the company hired a woman younger than him to fill the position. This month, Murphy, now 59, and his lawyer, Thomas Riley, have filed a lawsuit against The Day arguing the company discriminated against him because of his age and his gender.

The Full Story

In 2002, Farrugia took over as publisher of The Day. One of his first initiatives at The Day was naming Murphy the head of custom publications, according to a letter of recommendation written by Farrugia for Murphy.

Murphy, who began working at The Day in 1975, held that post until April of 2009, when his employment was terminated. During his tenure at The Day, Murphy never had a negative performance review, according to Murphy's legal complaint written by Riley.

Additionally, Murphy received a letter of recommendation by Farrugia after his employment was terminated in 2009. In it, Farrugia lauded Murphy for his “prodigious writing, editing and design skills,” which  “delighted readers of The Day and its affiliated publications for more than 30 years.”

“Ed possesses that rare blend of artistic creativity combined with detail-oriented tactical execution on deadline,” Farrugia wrote. “He sees the entire game board as a publication is nearing completion.”

In the fall of 2010, the person who replaced Murphy left. In December 2010, The Day advertised the position in its own newspaper, detailing the same skills and duties for which Murphy was responsible for when he held the job and the skills Farrugia praised Murphy for in his letter of recommendation, according to the complaint.

On Dec. 17, 2010, Murphy sent an e-mail to The Day's human resources department, saying he would take less money for the same job.

“Recognizing that the company certainly has an interest in cost savings, I just want to make sure folks know that I would not wish to lose out on an opportunity over the salary figure I used to command,” Murphy wrote. “Simply put: I would be flexible on the money issue.”

Murphy was never granted an interview for the position. Instead, The Day hired Faye Trafford, who is roughly 25 years younger than Murphy, in January of 2011, according to the complaint.

In the complaint, Riley writes that Trafford had “no managerial experience, and little, if any magazine experience, and is less qualified than (Murphy) for the position.” In an e-mail to Patch, Riley said The Day has refused to provide information regarding the education, qualifications, or experience of Trafford, and The Day “has steadfastly refused to explain in any principled way its decision to hire the present custom publications editor instead of Mr. Murphy.”

Murphy has now sued The Day, alleging he was not hired because of age and gender discrimination. Murphy alleges his gender came into play because the position description of the custom publications editor “reflects … bias in favor of female candidates,” partly because the position wanted somebody who “engages in local women’s networks” to help run The Day’s magazine for women, “Grace”, according to the complaint.

In the complaint, Riley alleges that Murphy lost $47,500 in wages to date and is suing for damages exceeding $15,000.

Post-Termination Settlement

After The Day terminated Murphy’s employment in 2009, he and his lawyer claimed he was let go because of his age, according to the complaint. The Day and Murphy “resolved the dispute” with a confidential agreement, according to the complaint.

Patch met with Murphy, but he did not want to discuss the case on-the-record on advice from his lawyer. An e-mail from Patch to Farrugia asking for comment was not returned.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 07:14 pm
Here's the latest Spencer from the AP, if we can believe them: Traffic in southwest ConnecticutRead More could be a mess for as much as a week until service is restored to the commuter rail line affected by a derailment that injured scores of passengers, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy warned Sunday.
Spencer May 19, 2013 at 07:10 pm
Another blow to not only NL's but the entire Southern CT's economy! Guess who will be picking upRead More the tab?
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 05:26 pm
I read that Malloy is hoping Monday but there are problems with the tracks and that has to beRead More repaired. Taking a guestimate, if it isn't Monday, maybe the end of the week.
John Martin May 19, 2013 at 02:42 pm
Of course, you are assuming that the government fund managers would be responsible. So far, this hasRead More been far from the case. The Federal government has plundered Social Security for decades, the teacher and state employee funds have been systematically looted. Of course they want to open this up to anyone with dollars in their pockets. I am not opposed to a program like this - in fact, economies of scale using voluntary contributions in a well-managed plan could be quite beneficial. If the government is going to be allowed to administer the program, there needs to be stringent safeguards, the funds must be untouchable, and there should be swift and significant consequences for mismanagement. Oh, but wait - this is Connecticut. Of course people will find their dollars funding the 'progressive' agenda with no regard for the state's fiduciary, legal, and moral obligation to the contributors.
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!