Opinion ID: 201249
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Plaintiff's Witnesses

Text: 33 Plaintiff offered testimony from four witnesses: (1) Maria Sanchez Coraliza (Sanchez), Assistant Director of the Human Resources Office and author of both the 1991 and 1997 job classification plans; (2) David Cordova Torrech (Cordova), now retired after fourteen years of municipal service that included serving as director of the Citizen's Office for the Mayor and as Vazquez's direct supervisor; (3) Linda E. Rivera Vega (Rivera), who was purchasing and procurement bids director for the municipality during six months relevant to this litigation; and (4) Vazquez herself.
34 Sanchez testified that when she became aware that Santiago was considering rescinding the 1997 plan and restoring staffing in accordance with the 1991 plan, she told him that I did not believe that he should take upon himself to do the action that he intended to do ... since there were explanations for everything that had taken place and that could entail certain employees might sue him and that he might have to appear in court. According to Sanchez, Santiago replied that if he had to go to court and the court assigned him to pay, that he would pay. Sanchez further testified that she advised him that the 1997 plan had been approved by a municipality ordinance and that he should seek guidance in that sense. 35 In answer to questions about how many employees were switched from career employee status to transitory employee status as a result of the Mayor's decision to rescind the 1997 plan, Sanchez could not give a numerical estimate. Instead, she mentioned some names of affected people whom she personally knew. After listing five people by name and saying that she would have to mention a whole bunch of them because there were many, Sanchez testified that all these people belonged to the NPP. 36 Plaintiff also elicited testimony from Sanchez regarding Vazquez's qualifications for the positions to which she had been appointed. In sum, Sanchez testified that Vazquez was qualified for all the positions she had held at the municipality. However, Sanchez admitted on cross-examination that Commonwealth law requires, with some exceptions, that before a position is filled it must be posted or advertised; that the vacancy must be filled using a system called the register of eligible or some alternative equivalent system; that the hired personnel must serve a probationary period of three to six months; and that an employee may only become a career employee after satisfactorily completing the probationary period. Sanchez also testified on cross that the municipality had not followed these hiring procedures as a general matter.
37 Cordova, director of the Citizen's Office for the Mayor and Vazquez's direct supervisor, testified to Vazquez's increasing responsibilities and growth as an employee during her tenure with him. During Vazquez's thirteen years under Cordova, he made two written evaluations of her job performance. Additionally, Cordova explained that he petitioned the former mayor to appoint Vazquez as Assistant Director of a branch of the Citizen's Office. For purposes of our appellate review, we will assume that Cordova's testimony regarding Vazquez's job responsibilities established that she met the minimum stated requirements for the positions of Secretary III and Assistant Director (a position that was essentially renamed Executive Director II in 1997).
38 Rivera, a member of the PDP, testified that she told Delgado that I am a person who under no circumstances will persecute anyone because as she [Delgado] knows, I have been persecuted for more than seventeen years by the NPPers and the Populares [PDP party members] who have allowed that I be persecuted and that I would under no circumstances would [sic] allow that and if I saw anything or understood that there would be any persecution, that I would rather resign and that is what I did. 39 Rivera also testified about her understanding and observations of political persecution during her time at the municipality. She explained her understanding that persecution involves leaving an employee without work, and when Rivera passed Vazquez's desk, she often observed that Vazquez had no work to do. Rivera made the same observation about one other employee. In consequence, Rivera told the municipal secretary, Dora Martinez Torres (Martinez), 10 to `watch out,' because since she belongs to another party, and was not giving them any work it could be understood that it was political persecution. Rivera said that Martinez was a member of the PDP and that she began work after the new administration took office. Additionally, she explained that while at first she did not have an adverse relationship with Martinez, their working relationship later soured because of Martinez's persecution with the employees. 40 According to Rivera, she used to have lunch with Martinez and Delgado, but upon seeing that they thought differently than the way I thought, well, then I understood that it was best not to have lunch to avoid taking any decisions, well, leave my job, be a part of a persecution, and remarks that might be out of order. When pressed as to what Delgado specifically said that convinced Rivera that they should no longer lunch together, Rivera said that [o]ne of Mrs. Delgado's remarks had to do with the process when letters were to be delivered that there would be equality — let's say that the salaries were going to be lowered or if their permanency was going to be removed, well, then it would be the same for everyone notwithstanding the person involved. 11 Later, Rivera testified that she and Delgado had lunch together perhaps two or three times and that they did not talk about politics. 41 Rivera was asked whether she could tell the jury if the members of the New Progressive Party employees were targeted for this personnel action of receiving the reassignment letters. Rivera replied: Yes, because the employees who were given permanence in '97, well, those were the employees who would be subjected to the application of the law in which their permanence would be taken away from them. Upon prompting, Rivera said that those employees belonged to the NPP party.
42 Vazquez was on the stand for three days. In addition to detailing her work history and the responsibilities of her employment with the municipality, Vazquez testified that her academic preparation and experiences qualified her for all of the municipal positions that she had held. Vazquez also testified that her immediate supervisor, Martinez, both made politically discriminatory remarks, including stating that [w]ell, hopefully they will kill all the NPPers and failed to give her any work from January to August of 2001. On August 24, 2001, Vazquez sent a letter and an accompanying table to Martinez detailing her work assignments since January 15, 2001 (excluding one month of vacation and one month of sick leave over the seven-month period). The letter informed Martinez that of the remaining five months of that period, Vazquez performed tasks on forty-two of the 106 work days. On cross-examination, Vazquez admitted that she never informed Delgado or Santiago of her lack of work, saying that it is not the mechanism, and that would be gossip. She further admitted that after Martinez received her letter of August 24, Vazquez was given sufficient work to occupy her work days. 43 Vazquez testified about the meeting on May 22 when between fifteen and eighteen employees were given their reassignment letters. She said that all of the employees at the meeting were members of the NPP who held positions of hierarchy in the previous administration. According to Vazquez, the Mayor began the meeting indicating that he was the person in power, that the Popular Democratic Party had won. That they had to adopt actions with employees, that they had to clean house and that they were going to deliver letters to us in which there would be changes in our salaries or our permanence; that whomever wished to go to JASAP had 30 days to do so, that whomever wished to go through attorneys, well, they then had to bear the consequences of their actions and that we would see each other in Court. 12 Vazquez continued recounting the events of the meeting, noting that Delgado began indicating that she was seconding what the Mayor had stated and she explained the appeals process. 44 Vazquez also recounted the details of what appears to be the only other time she met Santiago. When Santiago was campaigning and seeking votes, he visited the community where Vazquez lived. According to Vazquez, [h]e came up the stairs. At that point he introduced himself as a candidate for the Popular Democratic Party and at that point I told him that I belonged to the New Progressive Party, that I campaigned for the NPP from 1984. That I was a militant and that I had held assorted positions with the administration of Mayor Victor Soto and as all candidates he told me that he was counting on my vote. Plaintiff's counsel then asked Vazquez whether Santiago was able to recognize you that you were a member of the New Progressive Party at the May 22 meeting. Vazquez responded, He shook hands with me and greeted me. 45 Vazquez also testified about her activity on behalf of the NPP. She had been an electoral college officer since the age of eighteen and president of the committee for her local ward in Toa Baja. Vazquez participated in mobilization, fundraising, organizing, and all kinds of activities related to politics and the NPP.