Employment Lawyers Can Answer Your Employment Law Questions
the mediation was through the EOC office at the base. I have talked to an attorney and they told me to find someone else, they were not interested. I anticipate that they will settle prior to going to court. I have my evidence ready and I used to be a paralegal and I am now an expert witness in real estate appraisal related matters.
I have thought about summary judgement and I believe I can get past that hurdle. I know, I am crazy for trying to handle this myself. I do have a law school about 10 blocks from my house, so the research shouldn't be that difficult. I have contacted another law firm, but they have not said if they would take my case or not. I have considered hiring an attorney just for the trial to answer any questions that arise that I cannot address.
If I can't get a law firm to represent me, then I have no choice except to go forward by myself. I am not looking forward to it, but I know what I suffered through and I do want my day in court, win or lose I have researched ADA law and Title VII law, so I think I am fairly well informed. I do know that there are rules of federal procedure that are different than state rules and that is why I am thinking of hiring an attorney for the day.
I would take any help I could get. My filing deadline is down to about 18 days and I am going to have to get something going and soon. If your firm wanted it, I would be happy to let you have it. I am located in Little Rock, AR and the federal courthouse is about a block from where I work. This is what I sent the EOC office when this started. If you would like to handle this, my email isXXX@XXXXXX.XXX and my phone is XXX-XXX-XXXX.
2 d Bomb Wing Legal Office August 5, 2013
Barksdale AFB, LA71110
Re: Unauthorized termination and Citizen Suit Notice
Citizens may only bring citizen suits in federal court if they have "standing to sue". To establish standing, the courts have required proof of three elements. First, the plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact”—an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) “actual or imminent, not ‘conjectural’ or ‘hypothetical’”. Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of—the injury has to be “fairly ... traceable to the challenged action of the defendant, and not the result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court.” Third, it must be “likely”, as opposed to merely “speculative”, that the injury will be “redressed by a favorable decision. If you will refer to 42 U. S. C. § 12101(a) (4 &5) you will see that individuals with disabilities often have no recourse and this statute addresses segregation specifically. This letter will outline my “standing to sue”.
I understand that, in the United States, a citizen suit is a lawsuit by a private citizen to enforce a statute or statutes. Citizen suits are typically used in environmental cases however, some non-environmental statutes, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Amendments Act, also contain citizen suit provisions.
Base upon my research, the United States Supreme Court stated in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, that Title VII is "not a general civility code." Thus, federal law does not prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not extremely serious. Rather, the conduct must be so objectively offensive as to alter the conditions of the individual's employment. The conditions of employment are altered only if the harassment culminates in a tangible employment action or are sufficiently severe or pervasive. Ms. Sharon Jefferson created the aforementioned conditions on a daily basis.
This brings me to the first point of my complaint and justification for writing this letter. If you would please refer to 5 USC § 4303 - Actions based on unacceptable performance, section (b) (1) (a), you will see that
(1) An employee whose reduction in grade or removal is proposed under this section is entitled to—
(A) 30 days’ advance written notice of the proposed action which identifies—
(i) specific instances of unacceptable performance by the employee on which the proposed action is based; and
(ii) the critical elements of the employee’s position involved in each instance of unacceptable performance;
I was never given any written notice that “I was not performing up to the standards of a Copper Cap”, nor was I given a written notice of termination 30 days before my termination. The only notice I was given was given 2 weeks prior to my termination. This was a direct quote from Ms. Brenda Russo during my visit to her office where she informed me that I was to be terminated in 2 weeks or on March 15. I would like to take this opportunity to clarify what I am referring to.
ADA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008
SEC. 4. DISABILITY DEFINED AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.
(a) DEFINITION OF DISABILITY.—Section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102) is amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF DISABILITY.
“As used in this Act:
“(1) DISABILITY.—The term ‘disability’ means, with respect to an individual—
“(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;
“(B) a record of such an impairment; or
“(C) being regarded as having such an impairment (as described in paragraph (3)
My second point is that Ms. Jefferson clearly violated current ADA rules. Physical or mental impairment does not include simple physical characteristics, such as blue eyes or black hair. Nor does it include environmental, cultural, economic, or other disadvantages, such as having a prison record, or being poor. Nor is age a disability. Similarly, the definition does not include common personality traits such as poor judgment or a quick temper where these are not symptoms of a mental or psychological disorder. However, a person who has these characteristics and also has a physical or mental impairment may be considered as having a disability for purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act based on the impairment.
One troubling limitation experienced by some people living with MS is related to cognitive changes, which can include problems with memory, handling multiple tasks, and thinking and responding quickly. It is important that family members, employers, and co-workers remember that because most people living with MS have relapsing and remitting symptoms, an individual may experience significant fatigue, vision changes, problems walking, and memory problems. In many ways, the unpredictability of the disease, and the difficulty others have in “seeing” the limitations are as disabling as the limitations themselves.
According to a new report, prepared in October of 2012, by TrinityCollege in Dublin and St. Vincent’s UniversityHospital have reported new insights in to cognitive changes in people with multiple sclerosis. The multidisciplinary research involved neurologists, biomedical engineers and neuropsychologists. Their focus was on cognitive impairment which affects nearly 65% of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients and can occur in the absence of physical disability. Dysfunctions in speed of information processing, attention, memory and executive functions are most typically observed in MS patients, which have an adverse impact on daily life. It is important to recognize cognitive impairment as early as possible and to monitor its course frequently. However, neuropsychological tests to assess cognitive function can only be carried infrequently and do not provide an objective measure of cognitive impairment.
I would like to address the preceding paragraph in regards XXXXX XXXXX situation. I do not have cognitive difficulties in processing information, performing mathematical calculations or following orders. I do however, occasionally have lapses in memory and that is why I write down information that I am given and tasks that I am asked to do. This is not a constant problem and as it waxes and wanes over time. Most of the time, my memory is perfect, other times, such as very stressful situations, it is a minor problem. Again, that is why I write things down, so that I don’t forget to do them. I have 3 notebooks with instructions going back to my first few weeks here at Barksdale. I also had written notes on my personal hard drive that were written in Word. My memory problem is completely unpredictable and it can vary from day to day. However, while under the supervision of Ms. Jefferson I experienced an inordinate amount of memory problems. This was a direct result of the hostile and offensive work environment that she created. Yet she put forth no effort to mitigate my circumstance and continuously bombarded me with menial tasks. I told my supervisor in the GPC center, Ms. Jennifer Souza, not to give me 3 or 4 things at once. I told her that I do one thing at a time and move on to the next project.
I would now like to begin explaining the basis for my claim and the necessity of this letter. 2D Contracting Squadron erred in terminating my employment due to the following reasons.
1. I was not given adequate on-the-job training.
2. I have not been given the chance to work and interact with my co-workers, I was placed in the server room since my arrival at Barksdale, AFB.
3. My first supervisor, Ms. Sharon Jefferson, made comments to me that either violated or were on the verge of violating the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) rules. She gave me very menial tasks that took away from the on-the-job training that I was receiving. She was only critical of the work I performed, never supportive. Several times, she said something I did was not right and yet she would not give me an alternative solution. While performing these menial tasks she would often change her mind in the way that she wanted the job to be done. In regards XXXXX XXXXX statement, it would be very easy to say that I did not do something right because she changed her mind during the project I was working on. She then comments that I can’t follow directions when she changes the way the task is to be performed. I do write things down so that I don’t forget and I have the notebooks to prove it. I still got into trouble for not doing something the right way.
Her actions would viewed as an infraction of the EEOC disability discrimination and harassment section. The specific section I am referring to is Title VII, specifically to “Harassment by Supervisors or Managers”. Her comments about my education, can’t do the job correctly and always forget things are discriminatory and it is illegal to harass an employee because they have a disability. Her comments created a hostile and offensive work environment in which I was forced to work and that had an adverse effect on my memory. By creating a hostile work environment she merely aggravated my disability and I was forced to deal with it and try and overcome it. The portion of my disability I am referring to is in regards XXXXX XXXXX issues. The hostile environment she created elevated my stress level, when it is elevated it is often difficult to process multiple tasks at once. That is why I wrote things down, so I would not forget them. If Ms. Jefferson had treated me with respect and as a new employee in need of training, I would not be writing this letter.
The principal of Occam’s Razor is very applicable to the previous paragraph. The simplest solution is usually the correct one. In my case, my job performance would have been greatly enhanced and would have been much less trying if Ms. Jefferson had not made the comments that she did while she was my supervisor. It would have also been in my best interest, if she truly wanted me to succeed, not to create such a hostile work environment on a daily basis. In regards XXXXX XXXXX referring to the EEOC, I am very familiar with what it is and how it works. In graduate school I had the opportunity to compose a fifteen page paper on the interaction of the EEOC, business and disabled employees.
4. I am new to this field and I needed structured guidance in how the job was to be performed. As such, I signed up and attended the Air Force Institute of Technology MRC 102 or Mission Ready Contracting Officer Course in August of 2012. Airmen go through Tech school and then they have continuous learning courses they have to complete while they are on the job. Civilians do not have access to these resources and have to figure things out on their own. Being in the server room, I do not have the opportunity to interact with my co-workers or be a part of that learning environment.
5. In August of 2012 I was scheduled to have a quarterly review. I wrote down the things that I had done and the jobs I had performed during that quarter. I emailed it to Ms. Jefferson, she read it and made the comment “Are you sure you have an MBA cause you sure don’t write like it”. If you would refer to her response, you will note that her grammar, in this review, is not correct. I do have an MBA, have the SR/WA designation and I am an MAI candidate.
6. In October of 2012, Ms. Jefferson decided that our filing system was not up to par and needed to be fixed. As such, she had me pull every file that was scheduled to be destroyed in 2012, pull the staples and put the paper in boxes in preparation for its destruction. If you refer to number 3, section h, of my termination notice you will see where Capt. Schneider and Mr. Compton say that they found papers that were to be retained by this office for several years. Again, I followed Ms. Jefferson’s orders and I only put the files scheduled for disposition in 2012 in the boxes. I am not sure what papers they are referring to as I was not informed that they found papers that were to be retained nor was I shown what papers were to be retained.
7. My on-the-job training really did not start until I started working with TSgt. Carpenter. I have learned more from him in two months than I did in my first six months here at Barksdale. He has shown great patience in my training, given me guidance as to the performance and expectations of a contract specialist and has always been readily accessible. He has given me contracts to close out, contracts to build and contracts to award. In this respect, he has introduced me to the contracting career field and I was just beginning to understand the role of what a contract specialist really does on a daily basis.
8. The only thing I have asked of this job and this opportunity here at Barksdale was a chance to succeed. I would like to lucidify this comment a bit more. It would have been extremely advantageous to have had a detailed, concise, written plan, rather than the one I was provided with when I first started. The ambiguousness of this plan often left me in the position of attempting to train myself. The obscureness of my instruction left me taking classes that Ms. Russo said would not be applicable here at the base level. I was not assigned a task, sometimes for several weeks at a time, so I put my time into training. Which I believed would be useful and applicable to this job classification. As it turns out, the 54 classes I completed on line were nothing more than an exercise in futility. I was not given a task to perform and merely sitting, here staring a wall, was not a productive exercise and was a waste of an Air Force asset. Therefore, I attempted to become more familiar with what a contract specialists job entails and how to perform the tasks that I would be presented with.
9. I was never given credit for positive contributions. Many experts contend that the shock of termination can be eased somewhat if they hear positive feedback about some aspect of their work performance. "Even in a termination based on performance, prompted by the fact that acquired skills were not adequate for a particular situation, the person's assets and liabilities can still be acknowledged," wrote Richard Bayer in Business Horizons. "A termination-for-performance should not be an occasion for abuse." This is exactly what I experienced during my time with the Air Force, abuse of power by my supervisor. She never once said that I was doing a good job or that she was pleased with my work product. I was unfairly dismissed due to the fact that I was never given an opportunity to respond to the allegations made by my supervisor, no warnings (verbal or written) were ever given, a representative from human resources was absent and I had no input. There was no valid reason for my dismissal because my capacity to do the job was interfered with by my supervisor.
10. I had reasonable expectation that my employment would continue for the next two years and two months and I fully expected to complete my probationary period of two years without incident. My employment was vexatious and I was never given a chance to “get my feet wet” in the contracting field at Barksdale.
11. The regulations at § 1630.2(j)(3)(iii) provide examples of the types of impairments that should easily be found to substantially limit a major life activity. The legislative history states that Congress modeled the ADA definition of disability on the definition contained in the Rehabilitation Act, and said it wished to return courts to the way they had construed that definition. See 2008 House Judiciary Committee Report at 6. Describing this goal, the legislative history states that courts had interpreted the Rehabilitation Act definition “broadly to include persons with a wide range of physical and mental impairments such as epilepsy, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and intellectual and developmental disabilities * * * even where a mitigating measure—like medication or a hearing aid—might lessen their impact on the individual.” Id.; See also id. at 9 (referring to individuals with disabilities that had been covered under the Rehabilitation Act and that Congress intended to include under the ADA—“people with serious health conditions like epilepsy, diabetes, cancer, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, intellectual and developmental disabilities”); id. at n.6 (citing cases also finding that cerebral palsy, hearing impairments, mental retardation, heart disease, and vision in only one eye were disabilities under the Rehabilitation Act); id. at 10
(citing testimony from Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, one of the original lead sponsors of the ADA in 1990, stating that “we could not have fathomed that people with diabetes, epilepsy, heart conditions, cancer, mental illnesses and other disabilities would have their ADA claims denied because they would be considered too functional to meet the definition of disability”); 2008 Senate Statement of Managers at 3 (explaining that “we [we]re faced with a situation in which physical or mental impairments that would previously [under the Rehabilitation Act] have been found to constitute disabilities [we]re not considered disabilities” and citing individuals with impairments such as amputation, intellectual disabilities, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, muscular dystrophy, and cancer as examples).
12. Of course, the impairments listed in subparagraph 1630.2(j)(3)(iii) may substantially limit a variety of other major life activities in addition to those listed in the regulation. For example, mobility impairments requiring the use of a wheelchair substantially limit the major life activity of walking. Diabetes may substantially limit major life activities such as eating, sleeping, and thinking. Major depressive disorder may substantially limit major life activities such as thinking, concentrating, sleeping, and interacting with others. Multiple sclerosis may substantially limit major life activities such as cognitive issues, memory issues, walking, bending, and lifting.
The amount of hubris she displayed while serving as my supervisor was truly amazing. Besides my former employer, I am not sure if I have ever met anyone like her in all of the years that I have worked. By this I mean, hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one's own competence or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power. This is an extremely accurate description of Ms. Jefferson, she has a little bit of power and exploits it as frequently as she can. I also believe that it was her hubris that kept me from performing my job to the best of my ability. In regards XXXXX XXXXX former employer, I was an expert witness for the Idaho Attorney General and they prevailed on eight of the nine counts they charged him with. He displayed a similar about of hubris as Ms. Jefferson has shown me in the past nine months.
Also, the malfeasance she has displayed during my tenure at Barksdale has been unprecedented. As a government official and a person with a certain amount of authoritative power, she has abused that power. Used in regards XXXXX XXXXX on supervising a coworker, my working environment at Barksdale, malfeasance is an act of outright sabotage in which one party to the contract commits an act which causes intentional damage. A party that incurs damages by malfeasance is entitled to settlement through a civil law suit. In my case, malfeasance essentially describes, in full, my employment at the base.
In summary, I was not given a chance to succeed at this job because of the conditions I was forced to endure. Ms. Jefferson created a work environment that a person without disabilities would find difficult to work in. I had to overcome her hostilities and perform my job to the best of my ability. Another problem that was beyond my control was my work area. I was placed in the server room with two other people, our computer programmer and a contract specialist that works with 307 Bomb Wing/MSG, not 2Cons. I did not have the opportunity to have interactions with my co-workers and I was forced to train myself as to how to write a government contract. Another issue is, I was not given much work, this severely limited how much training I received and limited the work that I was exposed to. Proof of this is my DAU transcript, from October till November, I completed 52 online courses. If I had been given work to do, I would not have spent two months trying to stay busy taking classes that I thought would further my career.
I would now like to address my Notice of Termination. The following are responses to notice of termination and I will briefly touch on each of my 3 reviews I have had. It is also interesting to note that when I tendered my reasons not to be let go and my responses to my termination, it took our Major 2 days to read it and for me to meet with him. At the meeting, he said that he could not give me a letter of recommendation, but he would give me a positive character reference. Another interesting note is that this is the only job where I have received negative reviews and the only job that I have been terminated from.
On line 1, it states that my probationary period is one year. According to the Form 50-B, when I started, it clearly states that the probationary period is two years. Also, I never received a single phone call from Lackland, AFB to follow up on how my Copper Cap internship was progressing. I would have expected a few calls since they hired me and they are the Copper Cap headquarters.
Approximately two months ago I asked Ms. Russo about being promoted to GS-9. She said that there were certain milestones that had to be met and we would talk about it later. To date, we have never had a conversation about milestones or what I am expected to know and by what date I was expected to know it. I have been given virtually no guidance in regards XXXXX XXXXX Copper Cap program, what I was expected to do and know, or when any of these things should take place. There are rough guidelines I was given to follow, but each base is different and responsible for their own Copper Cap program.
In section 3, the specific reasons for my termination are outlined and I will address them now. Also if you will review my 3 reviews and notice the supervisor’s comments you will notice a pattern. The pattern I am referring to is that in each review, Ms. Jefferson only had negative feedback. There was nothing positive and she never offered an alternative solution.
A. Ms. Jefferson questioned my writing skills, she stated “that I should start paying more attention to my writing skills”. I was a technical writer for over ten years and I completed an MBA program, I believe that she is incorrect in regards XXXXX XXXXX ability to write. During the review, I used the word Laborious, she got out her dictionary and then asked me what this word meant. I replied, it means labor intensive, she responded by saying put “labor intensive” in your review. This came about as a result of my reviewing each file in the GPC card center, checking the training of each card holder and updating the GPC tracker with the current information. The GPC tracker is an excel workbook and it is 1,200 lines long, I considered this to be a laborious process.
She also had me pull the records on every open file and insure a pink card was filled out for it. There were more than seventy cards missing and I had to track down the person that had the file and get them to fill out a card. I question whether or not this is even related to writing contracts or on-the-job training. She also stated many times that she didn’t think I knew what I was doing. If in fact that was the case, why did she not show me the way she wanted that particular task to be performed.
B. During my time working with Mr. Langston, I ran reports for him and Ms. Jefferson on a daily basis utilizing EZQuery and EDA. My notice of termination states that I needed an excessive amount of time to perform this task. I performed this task near the end of the fiscal year and every other base was trying to run the same reports. As such, the program was very slow to respond and sometimes it would take two hours or more to even log onto it. After the end of the fiscal year, I asked Mr. Langston to grade my performance while working with him. He said that I would get a solid B.
While working with Ms. Fernandez, I asked the team leader of the custodial staff about cleaning off a return vent for our AC system. This person merely brushed it off with a broom and it took less than 30 seconds. I have not read the custodial contract and I was not aware that something as simple as cleaning a vent with a broom was considered a ratification. She also notes that in my training in regards XXXXX XXXXX COR and the CORT tool, I did not understand it. I understand the process perfectly and I followed every step she took in using the tool from setting the account using the Army website to getting the reports back from the COR.
In regards XXXXX XXXXX strike plan, I read it and I found a mistake that was in the original draft. She was not aware of this mistake and she thanked me for pointing it out. In an effort to improve the strike plan, I merely tried to add a table of contents that could be updated automatically if the plan changed. I attempted to do this but due to the different types of formatting styles in the document, I was unable to make the table of contents recognize the different sections of the plan. I informed her of this a day after I tried to make it work. When she refers to tasks and duties, I was told to “look over her shoulder” and see what she does on a daily basis. I had very few tasks assigned to me and very few duties. The things she asked me to do, I did in a very timely manner and I did not need constant reminders of how to do the tasks she assigned me.
C. In regard to my progress review worksheet, these comments are simply incorrect. I did not require constant reminders of how to accomplish my tasks. I requested for and I received guidance on using the correct GPC form needed to complete a task. Once I was shown which one to use, I did not require further guidance. I took notes in the GPC center because it is related to contracting, but it is very different at the same time. The comment where Ms. Souza gave me a task and I failed to follow through is correct. The task was to reply to two emails in regards XXXXX XXXXX holders accounts. I asked Ms. Harris to take care of this and she said that she would. I asked her for assistance because I was in the process of updating all of the files in the GPC center. Ms. Souza was TDY taking CON 170. I did everything that was asked of me in the GPC center and I did not have any difficulty understanding Ms. Souza’s orders.
D. The statement where I called my co-workers “dinosaurs” is simply not true. Nor did not say I did not like it here at Barksdale, I do like working at this base. I work with very knowledgeable people and I enjoy learning from them.
E. During my review with Ms. Russo and Ms. Jefferson, Ms. Jefferson identified things I needed to improve on. I gave her my perspective on her comments and the meeting was over. I had to sign the review even though I did not agree with or have an opportunity to respond to her comments in writing for the record. In regarding slamming boxes against the wall, that is simply untrue. I work in a cubicle and it is physically impossible to even touch the wall, there are empty boxes in the adjacent cubicle and I went to lunch after this review. This statement about me taking out my “frustrations” by throwing boxes is simply untrue. Also, I would like to point out, for the record, that I never received a copy of this review.
F. I do not ever recall making this statement. Ms. Jefferson has given me menial tasks that have nothing to do with contracting, nor on-the-job training, such as sorting through the files. These menial tasks have hindered me and taken away from my time that I could have been receiving on-the-job training or doing meaningful work.
G. This statement is untrue, I spend most of my time at my desk working on whatever is assigned to me. In regards to “attention to detail”, I have worked on three contracts and I have learned from them. As a matter of fact, I keep a copy of every peer review sheet in a binder that I refer back to. In reference to the “close out process”, I received very little instruction or training on how to perform this task and yes, I did make a few mistakes. This is to be expected of someone that has never performed this task before.
H. In October of 2012 Ms. Jefferson decided that our filing system was not up to par and needed to be fixed. As such, she had me pull every file that was scheduled to be destroyed in 2012, pull the staples and put the paper in boxes in preparation for its destruction, inter alia. If you refer to number 3, section h of my termination notice you will see where Capt. Schneider and Mr. Compton say that they found papers that were to be retained by this office for several years. Again, I followed Ms. Jefferson’s orders and I only put the files scheduled for destruction in 2012 in the boxes. I am not sure what papers they are referring to, as I was not informed that they found papers that were to be retained, nor was I shown what papers that they found.
I. This statement is untrue. I have excellent communication skills both orally and written. I have had no difficulty in communicating with co-workers, vendors, customers or anyone else. In regards XXXXX XXXXX training, my on-the-job training has been very sparse and my formal training has been fair in reference to the DAU classes and excellent in reference to the MRC class. I have taken 54 online courses over a very wide range of subjects. I was given a few training materials when I arrived here at Barksdale and one of them was a list of suggested classes that I take. I merely started going down the list and completed as many as possible. On one occasion, Ms. Russo commented that she did not see any point in my completing some of these courses because they were geared towards systems level bases and we operate at a base level, so they would not do me any good.
In my last review with TSgt. Hughes, she mentioned that I take too many smoke breaks. I take one in the morning and one in the afternoon and I have documented the times that I take them. She made another comment regarding the staging of the files that Ms. Wyllie and I worked on. Someone from the staging office, where the files are going to be stored, came to our office. They gave us specific directions as to how the files needed to be boxed up and how to document what files were in each box. They then gave us different directions two more times. So yes, we did have to go back and change the way we were preparing the files. TSgt. Hughes even laughed and made a comment that staging the files was a mess. I do not understand why this statement was even in my third review, it simply isn’t true.
Looking back over my time at Barksdale AFB, one thing comes to mind, Res Ipsa Loquitur. My performance is a direct result of my supervision or lack thereof of proper supervision and guidance. I excel in following directions, completing tasks on time and supporting my team in whatever they require. The only readily identifiable problem I have encountered here is the lack of clear, concise guidance in regards XXXXX XXXXX Copper Cap program. It would have been of paramount importance and immensely valuable to have been given a clearly defined career path, with the expectations clearly stated. The lack of such a document often left me in the dark as to what education I need, what I should be able to accomplish by a certain date and clearly defined milestones that would have to be fulfilled in order to receive a promotion.
I also have serious reservations as to the application of the on-the-job training that I have received. I was provided good training in GPC, Mr. Langston showed me exactly how to run the reports he needed, but the training is lacking in other areas. I am speaking to my knowledge of the FAR. The first real training I received in using the FAR happened in MRC 102 in Dayton, Ohio. I have used the FAR matrix and I have referenced old files to write the contracts I have worked on. TSgt. Carpenter has pointed out when I left out a clause or needed to add one into a contract. However, not being seated next to my teammates, here in commodities, has had an adverse effect on my performance. I have not had the opportunity to learn from them and discuss the different facets of the contents of a contract, which FAR clauses are applicable and why they are.
I strongly believe that there was another alternative to my termination here at Barksdale. That would be to have transferred me to another base, such as Little Rock, Lackland or Eglin. I could have had a clean start and I have serious reservations that it would have been as hostile as Barksdale has been.
I have been through three quarterly reviews and the supervisors comments have been entirely negative, no positive comments. I have serious questions about how the review process for civilians works. In the private sector, an employee and their boss sit down and discuss how the employee’s work was during the review period. Then, the supervisor writes a review, the employee has an opportunity to comment on the review and then a final draft is constructed. Here, it is exactly the opposite. The employee describes their activities during the period of time that is the subject of the review. The supervisor reads it and then makes their comments. The employee does not have an opportunity to respond to the supervisors’ comments, only agree with them, whether they are right or wrong. In legal terms, these actions amount to a motion in limine. This has been the case in the three reviews I have been involved with. It also reminds me of res judicata, fundamental legal doctrine that, once a something decided, I am barred from raising the same issue again.
I would also like to note, for the record, that I have never been given a written warning nor a verbal warning. I have only received real criticism during my three reviews. Feedback along the way would have been invaluable. If I was doing something incorrectly, then please tell me what I am doing wrong. Luckily, while I have been working with TSgt. Carpenter, he has helped on my contracts, discussed different parts of the FAR with me and provided constructive criticism. As I stated previously, if I had started this job with TSgt. Carpenter, I would not be writing this letter and I would be a productive member of the squadron.
I understand that there are several avenues available to me in regards XXXXX XXXXX information previously discussed. I have spoken with an attorney regarding this matter and he informed me that writing this letter would be in my best interest, prior to retaining his services. I would also like to note that there are several people in my squadron that said “I can’t believe they fired you”, “you were never given a chance to do the job” and “I saw what happened and they way you were treated. I will testify to this, but I do not want to name names because I have to work with them”. These statements were made by several of my co-workers and I am quite sure that they will be happy to provide signed statements as to what they observed.
As of this writing, I am fully aware of the derogatory information contained in my official file. I am asking that the following conditions be met as to the detrimental comments would adversely affect my employment either with a governmental agency or private company.
Disability harassment under Title I of the ADA (also referred to as “hostile work environment”) is a developing area of law, and this cause of action is being explicitly or implicitly recognized by a growing number of courts. The U.S. Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have previously recognized a cause of action for workplace harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. See 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1).
The Department of Defense has been involved in a number of harassment cases in the past few years. They include; BARTRON V. DOD: $92,500, Back pay, and Reinstatement Awarded to a FELSC Client for Denial of Reasonable Accommodation and Reprisal; FIVECOAT v. US AIR FORCE: $100,000 Awarded to a FELSC Client for Sex Harassment and Reprisal Discrimination; FIVECOAT v. US AIR FORCE: $100,000 Awarded to a FELSC Client for Sex Harassment and Reprisal Discrimination; WELLARD v. DOJ: Department of Justice liable for Disability Discrimination and Reprisal and LAMPKINS v. USPS: $25,000 Awarded for Disability and Reprisal Discrimination
A recent harassment case is, Davis v. Vermont, Dept. of Corrections, 2012 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN(D. Vt. Apr. 16, 2012). The court held that this conduct amounted to disability harassment as it was perpetuated by his supervisors and it interfered with an essential function of his job. I would also like to direct your attention to this website. It has a number of cases that discuss “Update on Emerging ADA Issues: Disability Harassment, Retaliation and Constructive Discharge”. The website location is;
I am not an attorney and these are the issues and cases I have come across from doing a cursory search on the internet. I am positive that a labor relations attorney will be able to cite additional statutes that have been violated and will be able to cite case law that is more on point with my claim.
1. I wish that my Air Force employment file to be sealed and its contents not be made available for review by either governmental agency or private company.
2. I am aware of and understand that there is a Practice & Procedures guide that outlines an appeal in regards XXXXX XXXXX termination. I wish to avoid this process as it can be lengthy and expensive on both the government and myself. I would prefer to enter into mediation in order to resolve this issue.
3. I had a reasonable expectation of continued employment at Barksdale AFB. However, due to my termination I was forced to move and neither my move to Bossier City, LA nor my move back to Cherokee Village, AR was paid for by the Air Force. I have spent a great deal of my own money in regards XXXXX XXXXX actions of the Air Force. I would like to settle this matter without the expense of private attorneys, legal fees, court costs and associated expenses. I would feel compensated or made whole if the Air Force was able to settle this matter in a timely manner. The sum of money that I feel would make me whole and compensate me for being out of work, having a baby on the way, finding another job, moving to a different city and the associated cost of such a move is $50,000.
4. Based upon my research of EEOC actions, ADA violations and review of the applicable Supreme Court cases the sum of money I am asking for, $50,000, is a very reasonable figure. I do know that the ADA can fine a business up to $55,000 for the first offense and $110,000 for each offense thereafter for not having ADA compliant buildings. It is usually much higher when a person is targeted because of their disability and it is aggravated by a supervisor.
5. Neither the Air Force, nor myself, wish to have this matter proceed to litigation. It would be in the best interest of the Air Force to comply with my reasonable demands and settle this matter as quickly as possible. ADA and EEOC violations are generally viewed in a very negative light by both judges and juries.
With respect to the third category, your prompt and reasonable cooperation to resolve this matter will minimize your own damages, while less than reasonable cooperation will increase your liabilities
I would prefer to address this situation amicably, provided that you, as the governmental body, unquestionably responsible for its acts promptly and responsibly with respect to the requests set forth herein. I trust that you would prefer to avoid expensive and protracted litigation. Your response within 10 days concerning this matter is requested and would be appreciated.
Anthony C. Orman
That is what I thought. It is just a matter of finding a lawyer or firm to take my case. Do you have any suggestions of who to contact?
Thank you for your time and advice. I will give you a good rating.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).