ECO Energy Ordered to Pay $51.5K in Wage Dispute, Discrimination Claims Rejected
Table of Contents
Case Background
Brian Radecki, a Connecticut resident, worked for ECO Energy Solutions, LLC in Windsor. The company operated under the name Dr. Energy Saver Home Services. Radecki joined the company in November 2019 as a Building Science Specialist. He was qualified for the position and received training after being hired. His supervisor, Brendan Fogarty, was a company member who oversaw Radecki’s work and played a key role in the events that followed.
Events Leading to the Legal Dispute
Shortly after training, Radecki began receiving independent assignments. Before one visit, Fogarty warned him to expect difficulty from Indian and Pakistani clients, referring to them dismissively as “Patels” and criticizing their cultural practices and negotiation styles. Fogarty also created a tense work environment, frequently yelling and displaying aggressive behavior. He mocked Radecki’s age, calling him “Mr. Rogers” and “AARP.”
Born in 1957, Radecki later raised concerns with Fogarty about the hostile workplace. Around the same time, he informed management of his need for shoulder surgery and offered to continue working in an office role during recovery. Instead, the company terminated him, citing his age and injury. On his final day, Fogarty made degrading remarks and refused to support Radecki’s claim for unemployment benefits.
Plaintiff’s Injuries and Their Impact
Radecki lost his job shortly after requesting medical leave. The company denied him reasonable accommodation for his shoulder injury. He faced age-based mockery and ethnic bias in the workplace. Following the termination, he missed out on wages, commissions, and potential future earnings. The experience caused him emotional pain, humiliation, and stress. He also lost professional standing and suffered reputational damage. Despite being willing and able to work with accommodations, Radecki was forced out and left without employment during a medical recovery period.
Claimed Damages
Radecki claimed unpaid wages and commissions. He requested compensation for emotional distress, reputational harm, and financial losses. He sought back pay, front pay, and statutory punitive damages. He also requested attorney’s fees and interest under Connecticut law. The claim included damages for the employer’s failure to accommodate his disability and for retaliation. The complaint noted that the company had shown reckless disregard for his rights under state labor and discrimination laws.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Brian Radecki
Counsel for Plaintiff: James V. Sabatini
Defendant: ECO Energy Solutions, LLC
Counsel for Defendant: Joseph W. McQuade
Claims
First Count: Disability Discrimination
Radecki disclosed a serious shoulder condition requiring surgery and requested a brief medical leave, offering to transition to an office role during recovery. Despite his ability to work with reasonable accommodation, the company terminated him. Fogarty reportedly remarked that Radecki was “older” and “hurt,” making him too risky to retain. The complaint alleges this decision was based on his disability, in violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act.
Second Count: Failure to Accommodate
Radecki notified the company of his need for leave and proposed a temporary modified role. The employer ignored his proposal and failed to engage in the legally required interactive process. Reasonable accommodations, such as short-term leave or adjusted duties, were never explored. This refusal breached the company’s legal obligations and caused both financial and emotional harm.
Third Count: Retaliation
Radecki’s accommodation request allegedly triggered retaliatory termination. Management’s remarks linked the dismissal to his medical condition and age. Fogarty warned Radecki he would get “nothing” and dared him to sue, comments cited as evidence of hostility toward protected activity. Terminating an employee for seeking medical leave constitutes unlawful retaliation under state law.
Fourth Count: Age Discrimination
In his early sixties, Radecki faced age-based mockery from coworkers, who referred to him as “AARP” and “Mr. Rogers.” Management labeled him a disappointment due to his age and injury. Despite contributing value through sales and experience, he was pushed out while younger employees were retained. The complaint argues age was a factor in his termination, compounding the discriminatory impact of his disability.
Fifth Count: Wage and Hour Violations
Following termination, Radecki was not paid for his final workday and did not receive commissions he had earned. Connecticut law requires all due wages to be paid within 30 days of termination. The company’s failure to comply allegedly demonstrated reckless disregard for wage laws. Radecki seeks unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, and legal fees.
Defense
Eco Energy Solutions admitted to hiring and terminating Brian Radecki but denied any wrongdoing. It maintained that all employment decisions were lawful, performance-based, and made in good faith. Allegations of discrimination, retaliation, or a hostile work environment were dismissed as speculative or legally unsupported.
The company denied that Radecki’s injury or disability influenced his termination, citing limited knowledge of his condition and asserting he was no longer meeting essential job requirements. His accommodation request was characterized as vague, and Eco Energy claimed it had no duty to reassign him.
It further denied any retaliation for medical leave or bias based on age or disability. Claims of harassment or age-related comments were deemed unsubstantiated, with the company emphasizing that all staffing decisions were merit-driven.
On wage claims, Eco Energy denied any unpaid wages or commissions, citing full compliance with Conn. Gen. Stat. §31-72 and arguing that remaining allegations lacked factual basis.
Jury Verdict
On March 21, 2025, the jury delivered a partial verdict in S. Brian Radecki v. ECO Energy Solutions, LLC.
The jury cleared the company of all discrimination and retaliation claims, finding no liability for disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, retaliation, or age bias.
However, it ruled that ECO Energy Solutions failed to pay Radecki earned wages, and did not act in good faithregarding those payments. The jury found no malice or reckless indifference.
Awarded to Radecki:
$50,000 for unpaid wages
$1,500 in economic damages
The Judge entered a limited judgment for Radecki based solely on the wage claim. All other claims were dismissed.