This is not a great photo for our time, but it’s smittenkitchen’s updated tortilla de patatas (halved– and it halves nicely). The tomato is a Japanese black Trifele tomato.
Petrosino v. Bell Atlantic, 385 F.3d 210 (2d Cir. 2004). An employee appealed the decision against her in her TItle VII employment discrimination claim, saying that while normally a Title VII claim requires you to apply formally for the position you want, her employer didn’t generally use formal applications to determine who got which position. The court held that this was insufficient so long as the option was actually available to her to apply informally for a specific position and not just to say “I want to be promoted”.
“Certainly, the rule is not inflexible. The law recognizes that “the facts of a particular case” may sometimes make “a specific application a quixotic requirement.” Id. But the exception is narrow and does not pertain simply because an employee asserts that an “aura of discrimination” in the workplace somehow discouraged her from filing a formal application. Id. Rather, to be excused from the specific application requirement, an employee must demonstrate that (1) the vacancy at issue was not posted, and (2) the employee either had (a) no knowledge of the vacancy before it was filled or (b) attempted to apply for it through informal procedures endorsed by the employer.”