Fired Colorado Firefighter Alleges Race and Gender Discrimination

A probationary firefighter-paramedic in Colorado who was terminated last year has filed suit alleging she was the victim of both race and gender discrimination. Cassidy Cordova filed suit in US District Court for the District of Colorado naming the South Metro Fire Rescue and three officers as defendants.

Cordova identifies herself in the complaint as a “black woman.” She claims she was unfairly disciplined over a citizen complaint arising out of a pediatric medical run. The child’s parents allege she acted “annoyed about having to go to the patient’s home in the middle of the night” and had been “dismissive of the parents’ concerns.” Despite her lieutenant saying nothing inappropriate occurred, she was issued a written reprimand.  Cordova claims that when she complained that the discipline was based on her race and gender, she was retaliated against culminating in her termination two months later.

According to the complaint:

  • In or around the same time period, Lieutenant Cook asked Ms. Cordova to remove an opaque nose ring and rainbow earring she was wearing.
  • Ms. Cordova immediately complied with these requests without issue and was not subjected to any disciplinary action.
  • A few weeks later, Ms. Cordova replaced the opaque nose ring with a clear nose ring to treat an infection that had developed at the piercing site.
  • Ms. Cordova reasonably believed the clear nose ring to be compliant with SMFR’s appearance regulation policy, which prohibited only “visible body piercings.”
  • In addition, white line employees had worn clear nose rings without incident throughout Ms. Cordova’s employment at SMFR.
  • In or around the beginning of August, Lieutenant Cook informed Ms. Cordova that the clear nose ring also violated SMFR’s appearance regulation policy.
  • Ms. Cordova immediately removed the nose ring at Lieutenant Cook’s request.
  • Less than one week later, Ms. Cordova was called into a disciplinary meeting with Lieutenant Cook, Battalion Chief Goedeker, District Chief Mayhew, Division Chief of Operations Jeff Tasker, and a human resources manager to address allegations that she had acted insubordinate and violated SMFR’s policies by wearing a nose ring.
  • During the meeting, Ms. Cordova explained that she had believed the clear nose ring to be compliant with SMFR’s policies.
  • Ms. Cordova’s union representative also stated during the meeting that white line employees had worn clear nose rings without repercussion.
  • Three days later, and without any further investigation or discussion, Lieutenant Cook, Battalion Chief Goedeker, and Deputy Chief of Emergency Services John Curtis informed Ms. Cordova that SMFR was terminating her employment based on her purported “failure to comply with South Metro’s policy and the instructions of her supervisor.”

The suit alleges a civil rights violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, violation of Title VII, and violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. Here is a copy of the complaint.

About Curt Varone

Curt Varone has over 45 years of fire service experience and 35 as a practicing attorney licensed in both Rhode Island and Maine. His background includes 29 years as a career firefighter in Providence (retiring as a Deputy Assistant Chief), as well as volunteer and paid on call experience. He is the author of two books: Legal Considerations for Fire and Emergency Services, (2006, 2nd ed. 2011, 3rd ed. 2014, 4th ed. 2022) and Fire Officer's Legal Handbook (2007), and is a contributing editor for Firehouse Magazine writing the Fire Law column.
x

Check Also

Convictions, Terminations and Appeals

What should happen to a firefighter who is terminated after being convicted of a criminal offense, when the conviction is overturned? That is the question facing the fire department on the island of Jamaica, but there’s a catch: The 2009 conviction was reversed in 2020.

UK Sexual Harassment Claims Rejected

A female employee of the West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service who accused a manager of being a sexual predator because he commented on her handbag, has lost her claims of race discrimination, disability discrimination, sexual harassment and unfair dismissal. Tayba Amber apparently did prevail on one claim: “victimization.”