.
Feedback

34 Years And Out At The Day

Former Editor Edward Murphy Sues New London Newspaper For Age And Gender Discrimination

Edward Murphy of Waterford worked for The Day newspaper for almost 34 years.

He covered sports, town politics, became a copy editor and then a copy desk editor before branching off as the custom publications editor. There he created or oversaw the creation of magazines like “Grace,” “Marketplace,” “Sound and Country” and “Spaces” while continuing to run weekly sections like “Wheels” and “Home Source.”

But in April 2009, when he was 56-years-old, The Day terminated his employment. At the time, the newspaper said his position was being consolidated, and The Day publisher Gary Farrugia later called it a “recession-driven decision.”

The person who replaced Murphy left in December of 2010, and The Day set out to hire a new editor of custom publications. Murphy applied, even sending the company an e-mail saying he would be willing to take less money for the same position.

He was never granted an interview. In January of 2011, the company hired a woman younger than he to fill the position. This month, Murphy, now 59, and his lawyer, Thomas Riley, have filed a lawsuit against The Day arguing the company discriminated against him because of his age and his gender.

The Full Story

In 2002, Farrugia took over as publisher of The Day. One of his first initiatives at The Day was naming Murphy the head of custom publications, according to a letter of recommendation written by Farrugia for Murphy.

Murphy, who began working at The Day in 1975, held that post until April of 2009, when his employment was terminated. During his tenure at The Day, Murphy never had a negative performance review, according to Murphy's legal complaint written by Riley.

Additionally, Murphy received a letter of recommendation by Farrugia after his employment was terminated in 2009. In it, Farrugia lauded Murphy for his “prodigious writing, editing and design skills,” which  “delighted readers of The Day and its affiliated publications for more than 30 years.”

“Ed possesses that rare blend of artistic creativity combined with detail-oriented tactical execution on deadline,” Farrugia wrote. “He sees the entire game board as a publication is nearing completion.”

In the fall of 2010, the person who replaced Murphy left. In December 2010, The Day advertised the position in its own newspaper, detailing the same skills and duties for which Murphy was responsible for when he held the job and the skills Farrugia praised Murphy for in his letter of recommendation, according to the complaint.

On Dec. 17, 2010, Murphy sent an e-mail to The Day's human resources department, saying he would take less money for the same job.

“Recognizing that the company certainly has an interest in cost savings, I just want to make sure folks know that I would not wish to lose out on an opportunity over the salary figure I used to command,” Murphy wrote. “Simply put: I would be flexible on the money issue.”

Murphy was never granted an interview for the position. Instead, The Day hired Faye Trafford, who is roughly 25 years younger than Murphy, in January of 2011, according to the complaint.

In the complaint, Riley writes that Trafford had “no managerial experience, and little, if any magazine experience, and is less qualified than (Murphy) for the position.” In an e-mail to Patch, Riley said The Day has refused to provide information regarding the education, qualifications, or experience of Trafford, and The Day “has steadfastly refused to explain in any principled way its decision to hire the present custom publications editor instead of Mr. Murphy.”

Murphy has now sued The Day, alleging he was not hired because of age and gender discrimination. Murphy alleges his gender came into play because the position description of the custom publications editor “reflects … bias in favor of female candidates,” partly because the position wanted somebody who “engages in local women’s networks” to help run The Day’s magazine for women, “Grace”, according to the complaint.

In the complaint, Riley alleges that Murphy lost $47,500 in wages to date and is suing for damages exceeding $15,000.

Post-Termination Settlement

After The Day terminated Murphy’s employment in 2009, he and his lawyer claimed he was let go because of his age, according to the complaint. The Day and Murphy “resolved the dispute” with a confidential agreement, according to the complaint.

Patch met with Murphy, but he did not want to discuss the case on-the-record on advice from his lawyer. An e-mail from Patch to Farrugia asking for comment was not returned.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 05:57 am
There is no "suckles away". The money is deposited by those that use it. The rest isRead More relentless retoric...
Daniella Ruiz May 19, 2013 at 05:44 am
another 'not for profit' that suckles away at the very core of peoples generosity?? better toRead More 'retire' the banking/WS thieves that casually gore the system with relentless greed, schemes and secrecy.
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Kate May 22, 2013 at 06:57 pm
That's wonderful Naty! If we can get enough people like yourself, who care, we really might be ableRead More to save Cohanzie!
Naty Bush May 22, 2013 at 05:12 pm
I'll try my best to get others to go!
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:05 pm
Oh, and please spread the word, and bring a friend to the meeting! :)
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !