Employment Law Abuses

As a male manager, currently receiving less hours than all other females. Hours and position responsibility have been stripped from me and given to a less-qualified female.

I was an hourly paid sales leader, making time and a half on overtime and holidays. In October 2014, I was promoted to a full time co-manager. On 2/20/2015, they took roughly $300 out of my check dating back to October, due to “back pay,” where they were paying me time and half under my role when I should’ve been receiving supplemental pay. Along with not giving me the adequate bonus that I should’ve received under my role. The bonus would’ve been somewhere around $500 and they’ve given me $85 as if I were still an hourly paid sales leader (part-time manager). I’ve called and I can’t seem to get a clear understanding from anyone. Nor have I signed the form that they sent later that week saying that I understand and agree to what they did and why.

After coming back from FMLA for maternity leave I was sent home because my plant manager did not have a place for me. He gave my backup my permanent position. I complained thru HR and they said I had my job and everything would be the same. However, they now told me they are changing my schedule and will divide my position with my backup, who is not qualified for the position. I did not apply for that schedule. I have been working there for over a year. It will be two years in April.

I worked from 1999-2004 for Maxim and was not paid overtime. When I spoke with one of the employees of Maxim to see what I needed to do or who to contact about the class-action lawsuit concerning unpaid overtime, she refused to give me the information.

I was being subjected to harassment and now wrongful termination by the Director of the facility in which I work. An attempt has been made to get me to resign, I filed a grievance to address the harassment that was taking place and was then terminated before my grievance was heard.

I'm an architectural graduate and former CA Licensed Architect. By my experiences the American Institute of Architects, a private Association, has placed all of the US State Arch'l Licensing Boards under THEM(!) by their National Council of Arch'l Registration Board, by which they effect a national stranglehold on licenses. Few pass!

Without a State license, by the laws they promulgated, applicants including rare 5-year B.Arch graduates must work for AIA Firms at low wages, unsteady work and rarely receiving benefits (white slavery). The credit for design is robbed by the firms. My reading of the Sherman Act states this is per se antitrust violation.

I am a former Non-Indian police officer for the Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Public Safety, Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, South Dakota.

First, I would like to give you a little background on my law enforcement experience and training. I served in the U.S. Air Force from 1994 to 2003 in the Security Police/Security Forces career field. During this time I received a massive amount of training in law enforcement and security. I separated from the Air Force ranked at E-5/Staff Sergeant. I began working for the Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Public Safety (OST/DPS) in July 2004. In November 2004 I attended the State of South Dakota Law Enforcement Training’s twelve week course, graduating in February of 2005.

On November 29, 2007 I was terminated from my position as a police officer. I believe my termination is retaliatory, wrongful, and possible illegal in nature.

Not only am I questioning how “legal” my termination is, but I would also like to know how after three and half years of employment I can be denied the right to an appeal or grievance. The following is a summary of event that led to my termination and that actions OST/DPS took and the actions that I took thereafter.

On November 10, 2007 two assisting officers and I were involved in a vehicle pursuit, which resulted in a fatality of the driver of the vehicle we were pursing. Furthermore three other people were seriously injured during this incident.

The driver of the pursuit vehicle intentionally attempted to strike me with his vehicle during a traffic stop, which led to the initiation of a pursuit. At some point in the pursuit the driver of the pursuit vehicle intentionally went into the oncoming lane of traffic, striking another vehicle which resulted in his death.

The driver of the vehicle that we were pursuing just so happened to be the father of the Chief of Police's grandchildren.

Several agencies namely the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the State of South Dakota Highway Patrol arrived at the scene and conducted investigations. I

t was also determined by investigation, that not only was the driver of the vehicle that we pursing was highly intoxicated, the the driver of the vehicle he hit was highly intoxicated. All three of the above agencies cleared the two assisting officers and myself of any criminal wrongdoing.

Meanwhile OST/DPS Captain conducted his own personal investigation in reference to the incident. On November 29, 2007 the Captain determined that the two other officers and I violated several sections of the OST/DPS pursuit policy, based on his investigation and witnesses statements.

Subsequently all three of us were terminated solely based on the Captain's investigation. The Captain never filed a report on his investigation nor produced any evidence to support his investigation.

Besides that, issue that I have with the Captain's decision is the following: While at the scene of the accident the Captain at no point directly asked the other two officers or myself if we were O.K. (mentally or physically) or did he ask any of us what happened at the scene.

Yet he spent a majority of his time speaking to and consoling the family members of the victim.

It is alleged that the Captain has a close personal relationship with the victim’s mother and that his wife is related to the victim’s family. This obviously raises another conflict of interest issue.

Furthermore neither the Captain nor Chief made any effort to “Critical Incident Debrief” the two officers or myself that were involved. Critical Incident Debriefing is standard procedure when ANY officer has been involved in a serious incident to ensure that the officer is fit for duty afterwards, yet I continued to work up to a week after the incident.

On December 10, 2007 I filed an appeal to the Chief expressing my concerns that it was a conflict of interest for the fact that the victim in this incident was his grandchildren's father.

The department’s policy stated that the Chief was to give me a response within (5) working days.

I was in the Public Safety Human Resources Office on December 17 at the close of business. On that day and I brought it to the Human Resources Manger attention that they had to give me an answer within their own established timeline.

Three days later I got a letter from my former supervisor and it was dated December 17. In this letter the Chief denied me any rights to an appeal or grievance, stating that I was a temporary employee, therefore I have no rights to an appeal or grievance according to OST/DPS Policy and Procedure.

My complaint is that after three and half years of continuous employment that denying me any appeal or grievance procedure is unfair, especially under the above circumstances.

To further complicate matters OST/DPS violated their own policy in reference to my employment status, it is stated in Policy and Procedure the position that I held was to be advertised every (90) days until filled or I was not supposed to be paid.

Despite this OST/DPS never advertised my position while I was in it and continued to pay me for over three years. My position was funded with Department of Justice grant money.

I feel the actions taken against me by the Chief and Captain were immoral and possibly criminal in nature. To this date I am still trying to find an lawyer, because I cannot afford the ones who are willing to take the case, or they don't want to bother because my case is against a Federally Reconized Indian Tribe and they don't practice law on the reservation.

I will fight until the end and I will not give up. Most of my life I have dedicated to law enforcement and bringing justice to others. I just hope that the two other officers and I get justice.

I am a shipping professional and worked in various kind of vessels majority of them were Special Heavy lift project carriers . I worked as a marine engineer in various companies and reached to top rank of Chief Engineer in 1998. I worked for various esteemed companies and from Year 1995 to 2002 I was employed with a in house management company of one of the world largest shipping Company MOL (Mitsui O.S.K. Lines ). To boost my career in shipping next step was to join shore job and become superintendent . A ship superintendent is responsible for all technical supports and operation of the vessels in efficient manner and generally responsible for 4-5 vessels .

I had applied for a shore job to the same company where i was working before in various vessels as they were aware of my credential . I was then offered a job as technical superintendent provided i could pass probation period and prove that I was able to carry out my duties as required .

On 8th May 2002 I joined the office of New Asian Shipping Company (A in house ship management Company of MOL in Hong Kong) . I completed my probation period and then i was inducted as full fledged ship's superintendent in 2003 . I worked at that capacity till March 2005 . I resigned and Joined another ship management company in Hong Kong for better prospects as i was given a promotion and boost in my salary .

I resigned and joined another company Univan Ship Management Limited Hong Kong ,as life was very hectic in here and i did not have any time for my family and myself .

I had then joined MSC Ship Management Hong Kong as superintendent and was looking for a good opportunity for a suitable job .

I got the opportunity to work in Glasgow office of Anglo Eastern Ship Management Hong Kong - Anglo Eastern (U.K.)
Anglo Eastern (U.K.) is an old office of Denholmes Ship Management company who are also a major share holder of
Anglo Eastern Ship Management Hong Kong . The merger of the company took place in year 2002 .

I was very much interested o work in Anglo Eastern (U.K.) as they were managing vessels from Dockwise B.V. . Dock wise B.V. is the most renowned company in the world who owns and operate the semi submersible type heavy lift vessels.

I joined this office on 26th of June 2007 , and realised I was not welcome .

I was provided with an accommodation which was by no means suitable for a professional like me . However, I adjusted and stayed there for a month .

Work wise I was very happy and compared to Hong Kong work pressure was not even 20% . I had time for my family and
myself and decided to call my family who were at Hong Kong to settle here . I have a daughter of 13 year old and I wanted to give the best possible education to her that is another reason for shifting to Glasgow.

At this juncture I want to mention you that during my interview in Hong Kong Mr. M.L. (Group Managing Director ) Briefed me that he has specially selected me for a position of superintendent in dockwise vessels as dock wise is a very special client of Anglo Eastern and they are not happy about the performance of Anglo Eastern (U.K.) . Mr. ML also added that there is old pub culture prevalent at the Glasgow office and slowly he will bring superintendents from Hong Kong side to change the culture and it was the purpose of my selection .

I have carried my duty in a responsible manner and in fact I am the most organised superintendent for my fleet which can be assessed from the operation of vessels under my charge .All records will be there in the inbox folder in my name.

My immediate superior Mr. BM did not like some body coming from Asia and particularly he did not like me since he could not point out any flaw in my work . Another reason for Mr. BM not liking me was I had experience of working in similar position for one year in a Hong Kong Company and he started seeing me as a threat to his job and that i might replace him .

Mr. BM is a close relative of Denholmes and he acts like a dictator in the office and ill treats superintendents particularly if he is not British . His body gesture is very crude and he takes decisions according to his whims and fancy .

I had some confrontation and advised him to refrain from ill treating me . I also told him once that if he works with me he will be benefited and i am not after his job.

Since he could not prove me incapable he started looking for framing some charges against me which will help me take disciplinary action against me and warned in September 2007 that I have been browsing internet during the office hours which is a serious charge . I proved that I did not browse internet during office hours for my personal reason and in fact charged IT manager and Mill Bill Matheson on invading my privacy . The matter was sorted out when they gave me an apology letter .

Again his purpose was defeated .

Then a cultural committee was formed aiming to frame a charge against me for sexually harassing colleagues of opposite sex . This is an internal information i got tht a letter of undertaking that I have sexually harassed some one and the letter is sent to Hong Kong office that my removal is on that ground to smoothen relationship with Hong Kong since I was selected for this job from Hong Kong Office and by the most senior group fleet director Mr. ML.

This cultural committee has no representation of our minority Groups of Hindus which are also working in the office . In fact I am the most suitable member for this committee as I am the most talented staff musically in the office I was never asked .

Mr. BM was picking on me and he tried to send many mails which were rude in which they were framed but I have provided him the answers for he could not catch me on my job.

all records will be in the common server if they have not deleted my inbox.

I had joined this office and had been working without any employment contract till 25th of September 2007 .

On 25th of September 2007 i was presented an employment contract signed by our Managing Director Mr. DL which I accepted and countersigned . One copy of which was given to me and is with me.

I do not understand if in three months they did not find me suitable for the job why they gave me the employment contract and what was it which changed from 25th of September 2007 to 31st of October 2007 .

Only 2things as per my speculation had made the difference

1. I made a verbal complain against Mr. BM to our MD Mr. DL.

2. They wee successful in getting a written complain against me by alluring or pressurizing her .

Mr. BM returned from his business trip of far east on 30th October p.m.

On 31st October 2007 , he called me for a meeting and presented me with a termination letter .

The termination letter is one week notice as per the the employment contract However, no company policy was observed for my termination.

I reported this incident to BM and I insisted that I will face any court of law if charges against me is proved .

In fact I have tried to make the working atmosphere congenial for every one I interact and remove a general sense of fear from the office .

Reason Why I want to make is a racial issue -

Mr. BM - Who terminated me o a false charge .
Mr. RM - HRD manager who served me termination letter ,
MR. DL - Managing Director without whose approval no decision for termination could be taken
Mr. BR - It manager who tried to implicate me on information and security of data

The 4 ladies who framed a charge of sexual harassment against me.

They are from different departments - but only one thing is common they all are white .

I Hope to informed you sufficiently .

All copies I will send it to you.

Thanks and best regards .

NKM
A victim of discrimination.

A big, successful company in Independence, Ohio whose parent company is located in Little Rock, Arkansas, has finally hit the brick wall that may well be it's undoing. After years of "at-will" employment and the weekly and monthly firing of hardworking employees, a rallying cry has been heard around the area. The bullying tactics of the company, the unecessary harrassment of its workers, derogatory statements on review forms, and tampering with completed work submitted by associates will finally come to light.

Two of the employees are now contacting EEOC as well as a civil rights attorney in the local area.

They hope to dig back into the history of the company for other individuals who have been fired under similar circumstances and had to tolerate the same conditions.

No more fear on the faces of these individuals, as they have had to face the never-ending possibilites of no unemployment compensation or the ability to find comparable work and pay due to bad references from the bully company.

Oftentimes the corporation failed to supply help or training to these hard working dedicated individuals and deliberately forced their hand, making them quit their positions. Under the guise of corporate jargon, they continue to operate a revolving door work system for many yet keep under their protective wing only a few.
Still, the bureau of Ohio Unemployment did not deny benefits to these two fiesty individuals and stated that the termination was unjustifiable.

Also, it seems that by leaving the hostile environment, another's sanity was saved since it was the only sensible thing to do.
Three cheers for individuals who stand up to corporate bullies!