The complaint fails to state a claim for either gender or disability discrimination in the hiring process. The assertion that plaintiff was a member of a protected subclass of "attractive males" failed to identify a recognized class protected by statute ( see generally Kent v. Papert Cos., 309 AD2d 234).
Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for disability discrimination predicated on his hypoglycemia and past drug use. Having been formally rejected for the position for failure to meet the "medical and/or physical requirements" for the job, he failed to allege that his admitted disabilities would not prevent him from performing the duties of subway conductor in a reasonable manner ( see Executive Law § 292).
The complaint also failed to state a claim for breach of contract. Nowhere did plaintiff allege or show that he had actually received an appointment to the position of conductor. Simply passing a qualifying test, without more, does not create a contractual right to the position ( see Matter of Andriola v. Ortiz, 82 NY2d 320, cert denied sub nom. Andriola v. Antinoro, 511 US 1031).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.