Question

fOLLOW UP ON THE CASE, HAVE TWO QUESTIONS BUT THEY ARE INVOLVED. IN FILING THE EEOC COMPLAINT WITH THE UALD, AS IN THE HISTORY, I HAD TO SIGN A PRIVACY AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE, THAT SAID IT PROTECTED MY PRIVACY AS WELL.   HAVING SAID THAT, I RECIEVED AN ADJUDICATION FROM THE UALD THAT CLEARED ME OF THE INCIDENT.

BUT NOW THE UALD IS PUTTING A NEW DATABASE OF PRECENDENTS I GUESSS YOU CALL THEM, ON EMPLOYMENT LAW, AND RIGHT THERE WAS THE FEMALE HARRASSMENT COMPLAINT OF MINE AGAINST CONVERGYS/ATHERTON AS THEY CALLED THEMSELVES. ANYWAY, THE CASE WAS JUST AN OUTLINE, THE CASE WAS DISMISSED, BUT IT DID NOT HAVE THE MOTION TO REVIEW RESULTS. YES, THEY SAID I COULD NOT SUE, BUT IT LACKED THE ADJ JUDGE SAYING I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ALLEDGED HARRASSMENT.   DOESNT THIS ENLARGE/PROLONG/OR MAKE GENDER DISCRIMINATION PERMANENT AGAINST ME, AS WESTLAW CAN AND WILL PICK THIS UP? I COMPLAINED TO THE EEOC, I HAVE YET TO HEAR AN ANSWER. THE LINK I FOUND HAS BEEN REMOVED ON A GOOGLE SEARCH.

THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE, IS THAT AFTER WORKING FOR CONVERGYS, I WAS HIRED BY SOS TEMP/SORENSON.   SOS HAD AN ON-SITE MANAGER THAT PREDOMINATELY COMMUNICATED WITH US THRU INSTANT MESSAGING, WHICH THEY GAVE ONLY 4 PAGES OF SAMPLES. IN THIS CASE, I WAS DENIED TIME OFF AND REASONABLE ACCOMODATION UNDER ADA LAW. I WON DISABILITY FROM SSA THIS YEAR.   THE JUDGE WOULD NOT LOOK AT IT, SENT A LETTER SAYING HE WAS GOING TO THROW AWAY THE CD-ROM WITH THE SAME MEDICAL EVIDENCE, WHICH HE EARILER RULED, THAT HE NEEDED TO SEE.

HE SCHEDULED TWO EVIDENTARY HEARINGS IN APRIL.   SO, MY FIRST QUESTION IS THAT IF SOS AND SORENSON HAD IM DISCUSSIONS, WHICH I WAS NOT A PARTY TO (AND THE IM 'LOGS' ARE NEITHER TIME OR DATE STAMPED) WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IF PRESENTED, BE HEAR SAY? SORENSON WOULD NOT DISCOVER THE IDENTITIES OF THE PEOPLE WORKING OVER ME.

IS THE JUDGES ACTIONS ACCOUNTABLE? HE DEMANDED I GIVE DISCOVERY AND BARRED ME FROM DISCOVERY, ALTHOUGH SOS DID GIVE DISCOVERY, SORENSON, NOT ONLY DESTROYED THE SHIFT TRADE BOOK BUT WILL NOT REVEAL EMPLOYEES. I KNOW THE EEOC HERE IN UTAH IS LIKE KANGAROO COURT, BUT IS THIS MISTRIAL MATERIAL? I AM CURRENTLY TRYING TO MAKE A MOTION TO REVIEW AS I DID IN THE CONVERGYS MATTER.

I KNOW ABOUT WHAT I WANT TO SAY IN REPLY TO SOS/SORENSON, BUT I NEED SOME LEGAL PRECIDENTS ABOUT FOUNDATION, IF THEY DESTROYED THE TIME OFF BOOK AND WHAT IS HEAR SAY IN RELATION TO IMs.

IN MY MOTION TO REVIEW, I TOLD THE JUDGE AND QUOTED HIM THE RULE, ABOUT EVIDENCE, DISCOVERY AND SURPRISE BTW.
THANKS MIKE NIEMI