Bias Ruling in Glendale Case Upheld

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a ruling that the city of Glendale discriminated against a Latino policeman who was passed over seven times for promotion into the all-white supervisory ranks.

By a 3-0 vote, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected numerous challenges by city officials to the ruling, including a claim that the officer’s ex-wife should have been allowed to testify about his allegedly “poor interpersonal relationship skills.”

The testimony was rightly held to be irrelevant because the couple had divorced nine years earlier, and the city had presented 26 other witnesses on the same subject, the court said.

It also noted that despite the city’s criticisms of Officer Ricardo Luis Jauregui’s interpersonal skills, he had served successfully numerous times on the Police Department’s hostage negotiating team during his 15 years with the department.

The court upheld a lower-court order to promote Jauregui to sergeant with back pay dating from February, 1986, the last time he was rejected.

Senior Assistant City Atty. Scott Howard, who represented Glendale, declined comment on the ruling.

The court said Jauregui had sought a promotion to sergeant for most of his police career, and had been among the top three candidates of the Civil Service Commission seven times since 1980, ranking first three times.

The final selection is made from among the top three candidates by the police chief and the four captains.

Seven Rejections

Jauregui sued after his seventh rejection and won a ruling from U.S. District Judge Dickran Tevrizian that he had been discriminated against because of his ethnic background.

Tevrizian rejected the city’s claim that Jauregui was rejected because of poor interpersonal skills, finding that he was an excellent officer who was well-liked by his peers. The judge also said there was evidence of discrimination in the department.

All the department’s supervisory officers during the period were white males, the judge said. In addition, he said, some police officers routinely made derogatory remarks, drew and posted “inappropriate drawings and cartoons,” and on one occasion posted an official department notice, all of which insulted minorities, including Latinos.

Tevrizian also found that the city’s anti-discrimination procedures, in effect since 1983, had no effect on “the day-to-day climate of racial and ethnic harassment” in the department, and left officers who were the targets of it with the feeling that the city administration condoned the practices.

Three black officers testified that they did not file complaints of discrimination because they thought it would be futile. The city tried to counter with evidence of complaints filed in non-police agencies, but Tevrizian ruled that they were irrelevant, a ruling upheld by the appeals court.

The appellate opinion, written by Judge Warren J. Ferguson, upheld all of Tevrizian’s rulings in the case, including his refusal to allow Jauregui’s former wife to testify, his finding that the city’s complaint procedures were ineffective, and his conclusion that Jauregui was a victim of discrimination.

Although the city contended that Tevrizian failed to give proper weight to subjective assessments in promotion decisions, the judge properly concluded that the department was able to discriminate against Jauregui by a purported use of subjective standards, Ferguson said.

Although subjective assessments in hiring and promotion are not illegal by themselves, a finding that they were used for discrimination was justified, “considering the facts of this case and the potential for manipulation inherent in the use of subjective evaluations,” Ferguson said.