ROCKLAND — The City of Rockland filed a response to a lawsuit initiated by Rockland police detective Anne Griffith, who claimed she was demoted and denied reasonable workplace accommodations and was subject to retaliation and sex, pregnancy and disability discrimination because she was pregnant.

Her complaint was filed in U.S. District Court in Portland against the city.

Rockland denies the claims Griffith alleges under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Maine Human Rights Act and contends that its actions were legitimate, reasonable, legally justified, and in violation of no law.

Rockland contends that the detective’s complaint and claims are barred in whole or in part because, to the extent she was disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, and Maine Human Rights Act, the city provided reasonable accommodations to her and otherwise would suffer an undue hardship if her request for remote work was granted.

Griffith has worked for the Rockland Police Department since October 2017 and in 2021 was promoted to detective. In 2022, she was sworn in as a special agent for the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit, where she investigated the exploitation of children across the state of Maine from December 2021 until July 2024 in addition to her duties for the police department.

The officer had filed a complaint in September 2024 against the city of Rockland with the Maine Human Rights Commission (MHRC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging unlawful discrimination and retaliation because the city denied multiple requests to let her work from home while she was pregnant, violating her right to a “reasonable accommodation” under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Maine Human Rights Act.

Both the MHRC and EEOC issued her a notice of right to sue in May 2025 since the city had not acted on her claims.

Griffith then filed a lawsuit against the City of Rockland July 18.

On Aug. 15, the city responded to the July lawsuit through its legal counsel, Attorney Daniel J. Murphy of Bernstein Shur in Portland.

Rockland responded to several allegations made by Griffith in the lawsuit including:

Griffith said she worked as a special investigator for the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit from December of 2021 until July of 2024.

The City said that from May 2022 through June, 2024, the city and the Maine Department of Public Safety, Maine State Police (MDPS and MSP) were parties to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the city, without any payment or compensation to or from the MDPS and MSP, agreed to temporarily assign the detective to perform certain tasks for the Maine State Police Computer Crimes Unit (MSP and CCU). Under the MOU, the city claims that they and the MDPS and MSP agreed that personnel assigned by the city to assist them had no employee rights with the two state organizations.

Rockland also denied that Griffith worked as an employee of the MDPS MSP under the MOU or otherwise. The city said she was required to maintain her responsibilities and duties as a detective in Rockland’s police department, and denied that she had any employment interest as a special investigator for the MDPS and MSP.

The MDPS and MSP received assistance with certain investigative tasks without payment to Rockland.

The MOU was terminated by its own terms no later than June 2024, according to the lawsuit.

Griffith claimed that most of her work for the Computer Crimes Unit was done remotely and she occasionally worked in-person or in the field to execute search warrants and interview victims, witnesses, and suspects.

The city said in its response that Griffith’s work for the CCU was carried out with a computer and that a portion of this work was conducted remotely. But the city said her primary work responsibilities were as a detective for Rockland, and not for the MSP and CCU. The city said her duties performed for Rockland included executing search warrants, and interviewing victims, witnesses, and suspects.

Griffith said that after her Family Medical Leave Act paperwork had been submitted, the city informed her that there would be plenty of administrative work to do and that she would be able to continue her work as a special agent with the CSU.

The city said that after receiving a more detailed “light duty” letter from Griffith’s physician Nov. 3, 2023, the city sent a reply email on the same day that stated the city was sure there would be plenty or administrative duties with respect to detective work and other work with the State Police Cyber Security to keep busy.

The city denied that Griffith was told or informed that she would be able to continue her work as a special agent with the CUS.  

Griffith alleged that while she was on light duty, she was not permitted to carry a firearm and due to department policy, this meant that the detective was essentially desk-bound.

The city said that any officer who failed to complete firearm training cannot carry a firearm in the field and that the city’s policy is to require firearm training as a prerequisite to carrying a firearm in the field. The city denied that it placed any restrictions on Griffith in relation to firearm training or use; she requested that she not be required to participate in firearms qualifications or practice until after her delivery, the city said in the response.

Griffith said officers are not permitted to conduct fieldwork without carrying a firearm and that while on light-duty, she could easily have performed her job remotely.

The city said patrol officers may not conduct fieldwork without carrying a firearm and denies that while on light duty, the detective could have easily performed her job remotely.

The city sent a denial to Griffith onDec. 11, 2023, in relation to the request for remote work, noting the accommodations that had been granted to her, including light duty, and further stating that remote work for city employees is not and has not been available.

The communication said: “our expectation is that employees are physically present at work. We must look at fairness for all; present and future, when making decisions as an employer for its employees. Your light duty position provides support in many other functions of the daily operations of the Rockland Police Department. This support can only be obtained by being present in the office.”

On Jan. 12, 2024, Griffith submitted a new request for remote work. In this request, she cited information from the PWFA, ADA, and EEOC. She also advised Rockland that her supervisor and a colleague were in support of her working remotely.

The city said that on or about Jan. 12, 2024, Griffith submitted a new request for remote work or telework but denies that her supervisor and colleague were in support of her request to work remotely as a detective.

Griffith said the terms of her employment were changed, and she did not receive full-time hours of pay. This is a violation of the PWFA, ADA, and MHRA.

The city denied that her terms of employment were changed and that she did not receive full-time hours of pay.

Griffith said she was not paid for her full hours by Rockland from November 13, 2023, through October 1, 2024. She used paycheck insurance, sick time, and PTO but ultimately had to go on unpaid leave. She alleged her maternity leave was going to be covered by PTO and sick time, but due to Rockland’s refusal to accommodate her, her maternity leave was unpaid.

From the end of Feb. 2024 until her return to work on Oct. 1, 2024, the city said she went on leave under the American Disabilities Act (ADA). During the period of leave under the ADA from March, 2024, she received paycheck protection insurance at a ratio selected by her. The paycheck protection insurance was an elective benefit from the city that was paid for by the detective.  

The city denied that Griffith had any “maternity leave,” as it does not have such a policy or program. The city said that received fully paid FMLA leave through Feb. 25, 2024 and she received a full payment during this time period by using her own accrued leave time and paid time off and from her receipt of significant donated banked sick time provided other municipal employees.

Griffith said that shortly after her return to work, she was informed her that her contract with the MSP and CCU had ended while she was on leave and that the city had elected not to renew it.

The city said the MOU expired on its own terms no later than June 2024 and in a meeting Griffith was informed of the conclusion of the term of the MOU.

Rockland asked the court to enter judgment in its favor and against the detective on all counts, deny her requested relief in all respects, including damages, attorney fees, interest, injunctive relief and other requirements or items requested in the lawsuit.  

Reach Sarah Shepherd at news@penbaypilot.com