By Jennifer Learn-Andes
The Times-Leader
WILKES-BARRE, Pa. — Two women furloughed from Luzerne County probation officer jobs in February 2012 have lost a lawsuit alleging gender discrimination.
Jennifer Caso and Jennifer Rebovich filed the action against the county and county Probation Services Director Mike Vecchio in August 2013, saying male probation officers with less seniority were retained over them.
Both women were hired in 2005 and said they had received letters of commendation with no disciplinary actions against them. They said they were informed by management in a meeting that they were furloughed because males with less seniority had more field experience — a claim they said was untrue.
The suit sought lost pay, reinstatement and compensation for emotional distress and legal and court costs.
According to lawyers representing Vecchio and the county:
Vecchio’s recommended furlough plan was largely based on which probation officers had certification to teach classes on control tactics and use of force. The probation department offers the in-house classes several times a year to staffers and doesn’t have to pay extra for an outside instructor if staffers provide the instruction.
Vecchio chose to keep four probation officers who have this certification. The two women and three men who were furloughed were not certified.
No female probation officers were prevented from volunteering to obtain this training certification, Vecchio said.
Vecchio said he was forced to present a furlough plan to court administration because county council reduced the probation department’s operating budget from $9.3 million to $8.8 million in 2012. James DeJoseph, William Sharkey and Jonathan Veet also were furloughed. Now the department has 61 probation officers, according to the county records.
U.S. District Judge Robert D. Mariani issued an order Tuesday ruling in favor of the county and Vecchio. Mariani also granted the county’s request for a summary judgment instead of proceeding to a trial.
His opinion says the two probation officers had no legal basis to sue the county because they worked for the county Court of Common Pleas, which is part of the state’s judicial system and immune from private lawsuits under the U.S. Constitution.
While non-court county officials fund probation and approve union contracts, the county court retains “sole and exclusive right” over personnel, he said. The county’s home rule charter also makes it clear the county’s personnel code can’t interfere with the court’s constitutional rights to hire, fire and supervise its personnel, he said.
Even if the county could be considered a valid defendant, Mariani said the probation officers failed to produce evidence the county or Vecchio treated them differently due to their gender.
Vecchio and the county provided a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the layoff — county budget cuts and the furloughed workers’ lack of instructor training, he said.
Caso and Rebovich did not prove women were excluded from attaining certification or that men were offered the opportunity to obtain certification as opposed to seeking it on their own, the judge said.
Also, other female probation officers remained on staff while three males were furloughed, he said.
“Under these circumstances, no reasonable jury could conclude that defendants’ proffered rationale for furloughing plaintiffs was a pretext for gender discrimination,” he wrote.
Rebovich, who is married to past county chief clerk/manager Sam Guesto, was hired to a different county court position as a magisterial office secretary at a compensation of $24,202 in February 2013, county records show. She was making around $53,500 at the time of her furlough.