Commission dismisses Olmsted case
Published 11:06 am Friday, February 10, 2012
The lawyer for the former supervisor of the Freeborn County Crime Victims Crisis Center who alleges she was terminated as a result of retaliation or age and gender bias said Friday that a dismissal notice from the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission only means the agency thinks the dispute should be hashed out in court.
However, the Freeborn County administrator and Rose Olmsted’s lawyer contradict each other over whether there was an investigation at all.
Lawyer Larry Schaefer said the notice came from the federal agency, and they’re still waiting for the state’s Department of Human Rights to issue a notice.
“The important thing from our perspective is this wasn’t a merits decision at all,” Schaefer said. “There was no investigation, no taking of testimony.”
He said the department will likely issue a similar notice, then Olmsted’s next step would be to take the matter to court.
Freeborn County Administrator John Kluever said he received the notice from the EEOC as well.
“We had hoped they would do a thorough and complete investigation, and it appears they did,” Kluever said.
Kluever said that no matter what the federal and state agencies say, there’s always the option to take civil action.
Olmsted, 60, had worked for Freeborn County for 38 years but was among 11 county employees out of work during a 20-day state government shutdown last July. When the shutdown ended, she was the only worker the county didn’t rehire.
She sued the county for “discrimination and reprisal” Nov. 28, 2011, by filing charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.
In her suit, Olmsted alleges that the Freeborn County Board of Commissioners and her manager, Department of Human Services Director Brian Buhmann, used the state government shutdown as a ruse to terminate her employment with the county.
She also alleges that Buhmann did not value the contributions of strong women in the department and alleges he attempted in part to justify Olmsted’s dismissal based on her salary level and tenure, both of which were traceable to her age, according to her Schaefer.
Olmsted, who supervised the Crime Victims Crisis Center, also oversaw the Domestic Abuse Prevention Program and spearheaded the Freeborn County Crisis Response Team. The Crisis Response Team is trained to support people affected by hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, floods, vehicle crashes and shootings, to name a few.
Though she was laid off during the shutdown, she was ultimately terminated in October. As the director, she was the only non-union employee within the small department.
County officials have stated Olmsted’s position, which carried with it a salary of about $75,000 plus benefits, was cut as the county faces budget cuts in the coming year.
They said the services the crisis center provides were deemed not mandatory, suggesting it could be handled in the nonprofit realm, though they admitted it is likely other county programs would feel additional strain if the center’s programs were eliminated.
Schaefer, of the Schaefer Law Firm of Minneapolis, argued that if finances truly motivated county officials, Olmsted would have been more than willing to discuss a transition into retirement that would have involved reduced duties and pay.
“This would have ensured that the most needy citizens of the county continued to benefit from her tireless advocacy, experience and management of the volunteer workforce,” Schaefer said.
He said Buhmann had clear motivation to retaliate against Olmsted and often expressed disdain for the services Olmsted was in charge of.
In the spring of 2011, Olmsted was required to participate in a consultation about staff morale and Buhmann’s management practices conducted at the county’s expense. In the consultation, Olmsted reported concerns about Buhmann’s management and his disdain for her, her volunteers and the crisis services.
Schaefer said Buhmann found out about the complaints and from that point forward was “overtly hostile” to Olmsted. The lawyer alleged that the director used the state shutdown as a pretext to justify her termination.