DATE: Saturday, November 1, 1997            TAG: 9711010687

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B5   EDITION: FINAL 

                                            LENGTH:   88 lines

VIRGINIA [BRIEFS]

Colonial Downs pushes its off-track betting referendums

RICHMOND - Colonial Downs tried Friday to allay fears about the effects of opening off-track betting parlors in three Virginia cities by trotting out police who said the existing three parlors did not increase crime.

``We are pleased to report we have not had one crime in this facility,'' said Lt. Frederick Pleasants, coordinator of off-duty officers for the Richmond Police Department. Colonial Downs hires off-duty officers to guard its parlors.

Colonial Downs, which operates a pari-mutuel track in New Kent County east of Richmond, wants voters in Fredericksburg, Roanoke and Martinsville to approve off-track parlors where gamblers can bet on televised races from around the country. Voters will be able to decide on the proposals on Election Day on Tuesday.

The company has OTBs in Richmond, Chesapeake and New Kent, and permission to build parlors in Hampton and Brunswick County.

The parlors are vital for the survival of Colonial Downs. The average bet per person at the track was a little more than $50 for the entire 30-day season. But the average wager at the OTBs, which are open year-round, is about $240. Because wagering is high and costs are low, the OTBs pay the bills and purses for the track.

During Friday's news conference, O.J. Peterson III, the president of Colonial Downs, also said that the parlors will bring in tax revenue for localities and attract tourists.

``There will be people lured to the towns fortunate enough to get this sport,'' he said.

That did little to persuade opponents in the three localities holding referendums.

``We think that off-track gambling is not an appropriate activity for Fredericksburg,'' said Jesse S. Franklin, a real estate broker and head of an anti-OTB group, ``It causes compulsive gambling. It's unfair competition to local restaurants and sports bars. It will be harmful to the real tourism in this area, which is historic in nature.''

His concerns were echoed by Nelson Harris, a Roanoke City Council member and a minister at Ridgewood Baptist Church.

``Colonial Downs has tried to portray these parlors as places where the middle and upper classes go to for innocent fun, but our point is that any legalized gambling is the exploitation of those least able to afford it,'' he said.

State court drops case of fired pregnant woman

RICHMOND - A Lynchburg woman who says she was fired because she was pregnant has no grounds under state law to pursue a claim against her former employer, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled Friday.

Laura Doss sued Jamco Inc. in state and federal court, claiming the company, based in Forest, violated laws against sex discrimination when she was fired.

But in a unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice Harry L. Carrico, the court found that the Virginia Human Rights Act does not cover her case.

The act was amended in 1995 to change the anti-discrimination requirements, making them apply only to companies with more than five and fewer than 15 employees and limiting the damages that an illegally dismissed employee could recover. Jamco has more than 100 employees.

``My client is disappointed,'' said Gary Coates, Doss' lawyer. ``We certainly don't agree with the opinion and we think it moves backwards when it comes to protecting employees who have been victims of discrimination.''

But Doss' federal case is unaffected by the state ruling, Coates said. Federal law covers companies with more than 20 employees, which includes Jamco, he said.

``Fortunately for Ms. Doss, Jamco had the number of employees it did,'' Coates said.

The lawsuit does not ask for a specific amount in damages, but does seek lost wages, attorney fees, compensation for emotional distress and punitive damages.

Doss interviewed for a job with Jamco in February 1996. The company representative made no mention of leave being prohibited during Jamco's busy season, according to the lawsuit. Jamco distributes magazine advertisement inserts, with the busy season described as the winter holiday season.

Doss was offered a position as an analyst a few days after the interview. Doss then resigned from her job as a supervisor at Wal-Mart and prepared to start her new job.

In the meantime, she discovered that she was pregnant. When she reported to work March 11, 1996, she told her supervisors about the pregnancy. She was fired a day later because the company said it was unacceptable for her to be away from the job during the busy season.

Doss gave birth to a baby boy later that year and got back her job at Wal-Mart after Jamco fired her. KEYWORDS: DISCRIMINATION PREGNANCY LAWSUIT

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu