State disability agency sued for pushing out disabled employees

The state agency responsible for helping New Yorkers with disabilities is being accused of failing to accommodate two disabled employees of its own.

Two administrative law judges at the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance have sued the agency, saying officials upended years-old remote work arrangements by requiring them to hold hearings in person, despite medical conditions that make commuting or working in an office difficult and, in some cases, dangerous.

Both judges say they were able to do their jobs remotely for years, but that the agency recently changed the terms of their accommodations. The result, they allege, was being forced to make a choice between risking their health, burning through accumulated leave or facing disciplinary action.

Richard Krinsky filed suit Oct. 20 in Albany County Supreme Court, alleging that OTDA discriminated against him because of his disabilities, retaliated against him and denied him promotions. A second hearing officer, Jacqueline Linares, filed a similar lawsuit in September, saying the agency refused to let her continue conducting hearings remotely and threatened her with discipline if she could not report in person.

Krinsky, who has congenital degenerative autoimmune psoriatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, asthma and allergies, is immunocompromised, according to the complaint. He was granted a full remote work accommodation in 2021, with exceptions for certain meetings, trainings and other assignments.

The agency renewed the arrangement annually through 2025.

But after requiring him to renew his accommodation in March 2026, OTDA approved it the following month with a significant change – Krinsky would have to appear in person for hearings. The complaint says he had also suffered multiple cerebral and cardiac infarctions in March, further worsening his health and causing physical and cognitive impairments.

Management hindered career advancement

Beyond the immediate effects of the policy change, Krinsky also claims that management has hindered his career advancement for years due to his disability. He says he applied for at least nine promotions after receiving his initial accommodation in 2021, but was repeatedly passed over.

During interviews, he alleges, agency officials emphasized the importance of being physically present, even though many managers and supervisors worked remotely.

Linares, meanwhile, has a degenerative spinal condition that makes prolonged sitting, standing and physical exertion difficult. Her doctors had determined that commuting by public transportation from her home in northern New Jersey could aggravate her condition and put her at risk of injury, according to her lawsuit.

OTDA renewed Linares’s remote work accommodation in January, but added the same requirement that she attend hearings in person. When she objected, the agency’s accommodations coordinator allegedly told her she could accept the situation or give up the accommodation.

After Linares said she was physically unable to conduct an in-person hearing calendar in May, Associate Deputy Commissioner Samuel Spitzberg allegedly told her she would have to use her leave-time, or she could be fired. 

A former OTDA employee, who requested anonymity, told The Chief that the remote work change represented a larger systemic issue in the department.

“Unilaterally, they changed their policy,” the former employee said.

The former employee questioned the agency’s approach to scheduling in-person hearings, alleging that it sometimes books roughly 100 appellants for a single day despite anticipating that many will not appear. The former employee said the practice can create additional obstacles for people who rely on transportation services or have disabilities.

Separate racial discrimination complaints

The employee also said they had filed a separate discrimination complaint against the agency with the state Division of Human Rights, which coincided with the emergence of several similar complaints that were shared with The Chief. 

Both complaints alleged racial inequity within the Office of Administrative Hearings, including that qualified Black employees were passed over for promotions while white employees, particularly white women, were favored for management positions. It also alleges that Black staff faced heightened scrutiny, reduced responsibilities and a hostile work environment. 

“Black staff must continually ‘prove’ their worth through additional exams or obstacles. Black staff are asked to prove they are able to do the work while white staff are assumed to be knowledgeable,” the complaint reads. The authors also threaten a class-action lawsuit against OTDA.

OTDA did not respond to a request for comment regarding the disability lawsuit nor the discrimination allegations. 

The former employee alleged similar behavior, which ultimately made them leave. 

“I was kind of forced to quit because they just made it unbearable for me to be working there,” the former employee said.