Complaint Letter Of Complaint

Marcus Ashmore and Terrell Lee Green were maintenance workers for J.P. Thayer Co., Inc. under supervisor Gene Fye. After a particular incident of harassment on January 16, 2001, Plaintiffs reported Fye to Tricia Johnson, the Assistant Property Manager. At this time, Johnson did nothing about the complaint. The harassment continued, and on January 26, Plaintiffs complained to the Property Manager, Mary Frances de Rivera. In response, de Rivera verbally reprimanded Fye. This, however, did not stop Fye’s harassment. Instead of reporting the behavior to Defendant, Plaintiffs hired an attorney who wrote a letter to Defendant saying that Ashmore and Green were going to file charges of discrimination with the EEOC. On February 22, Fye was fired by Defendant. This came three days after getting the letter and about a month after the initial harassment complaints.

Complainant is an African-American female. Prior to the alleged incident of discrimination, Complainant had used the Respondent’s copier on several occasions. Complainant contends that in November of 2011, she entered Respondent’s store to use the copier. Complainant alleges that something went wrong with the copier and one of the Respondent’s employees accused her of not knowing how to properly operate the machine. Complainant contends that she was embarrassed and offended that Respondent’s employee did not believe she could operate the machine and she subsequently engaged in a heated conversation with the employee which resulted in the employee calling the police and Complainant being arrested for disorderly conduct. Complainant

When Mr. Richard was unload his bus on 8/16/17 with his stop signs out at PVM to go get another load of students another bus drove around him, while he was unloading. After he left all the buses started unload their students and the same bus driver started back up her bus with students all around her bus. That evening I asked Mr. Geraci what can we do about the safety issues with that bus driver and he told me in front of 4 other bus driver. That she is going to have a hit a student before anything will get done. I told Mr. Geraci that was wrong and he told me to call Mr. Yates. So, I call Mr. Yates. Me and him had words and he got very ugly with me so I told

In today’s world, police brutality has become a type of misconduct that American police officers are getting accustomed to utilizing against American citizens. On July 17, 2014, Eric Garner died in Staten Island, New York after ununiformed police officer Daniel Pantaleo placed Garner into a chokehold after Pantaleo had attempted to arrest Garner for selling untaxed cigarettes. After being put into a chokehold for fifteen seconds, Garner became unconscious and suffered a cardiac arrest while being transported to the hospital (Goldstein and Schweber). According to the National Police Misconduct Reporting Project in Figure 1, 23.8% of 6,613 officers were accused of using excessive force among people. In recent years, cases of police brutality

DEFENDANTS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2-603 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, DISMISS COUNTS I, II, VI AND VII PURSUANT TO SECTION 2-619.1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

I believe it is necessary for me to file a lawsuit for defamation of character, and sexual harassment, because this is the only way for me to stop the rumors about me that started with the Process Support Supervision Shelia Bradley in the Documentation Production Department. I cannot help but think that my undoing was because I did not lie about the Former District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons, and when I think about all the things that happened to me when I did not comply. I wish I had, and then again when I think about it, I am glad that I did not, because this could have all have been a trap with no way out. It all started with a meeting called by Shelia

In this case of Toronto Transit Commission v. A.T.U., the union grieved foreman, Mr. Vito Stina’s harassment as it provides an unhealthy work environment. Union sought his removal, however, employer did not accuse the foreman with any harassments. The arbitrator was noted that foreman has harassed griever with criticisms and public humiliation, that crossed the boundary. The harassments continued on a regular basis, which showed ignorance and disrespect. At the end of the day, foreman has ripped apart griever’s dignity. Griever had filed a hand to the employer explaining the harassments he has been experiencing, however, not much was done. When the arbitrator was informed about this issue, arbitrator had to conclude that the negative influence and the impact on the griever was too big to ignore. Therefore, it provided griever $25 000 for the hardships. Then, arbitrator stated new rules surrounding this problem in order to minimize the may arise: (1) the employer now has to ensure the griever had a harassment free workplace, (2) employer was to not work the the griever in the same area, and (3)

The next day Lennie and I enter a bunkhouse room with whitewashed walls and unpainted floor. There were about eight bunks, some have blankets some don’t, over each bunk there were these apple box that were made to put in our own personal belongings. There was also little regular daily life’s supplies in the room, including razors, magazines, medicines and all kind of stuff loaded in the shelve, there were even a big table for playing cards. As the old man address Lennie and I into this new work place, he give us instruction to where we will be resting tonight, he told us that the boss was expecting us last night and will be furious if find us there this morning, I walk over the bed and suddenly I see a yellow can on the ground, now I wonder what kind of disgusting bed is he giving us?

This letter is in follow-up to your discussion with RPAS on 9/29/17 regarding the care your son received at Chippenham Hospital Emergency Department (ED) on June 6, 2016.

I am pleased to report that we were able to settle your Workers’ Compensation case for the total amount of $135,000.00 which was $5,000.00 more than you authorized me to accept. The net to you per our fee agreement will be $108,000.00 tax free. We will have paperwork for you to sign within the next week or two. After that, we will present the settlement to a Worker’s Compensation Court Judge for approval.

On December 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint and named Neven, Nash, Pugh, and Rainone as defendants. Again, Plaintiff never named Cox as a defendant, despite being listed as a defendant for Count VI. Plaintiff did not serve Neven, Nash, and Pugh until May 10, 2017, which is 134 days from the time the Amended Complaint was filed. Defendants Cox and Rainone have yet to be served. Plaintiff will not be able to show good cause as to why service was not completed within 120 days. Furthermore, Plaintiff attempted to make a motion to extend time to serve, but Plaintiff did not file it as required by Eighth Judicial District Court Rules. Plaintiff offered no memorandum of authority and only stated his reasoning for an extension. Pursuant

Supervisor did a write-up and discriminated against me by calling me, "Little Beaner." Also he said, "I can fire you and hire someone prettier than you." Then he made me sign a blank write-up and threaten to fire me. He told me he was writing me up for parking violation which I was not notified in advance about the parking spot changes. I asked for a copy, but he refused. I filed a confidential letter of complaint with coworkers to HR and ethics point online on 2/26/2016, an investigation took place on 5/25/2016, which resulted in supervisor

My name is Lakesha Godwin and I am the CUA Case Manager for Miracle Choice.

Arguably, the requests to set aside the NJP are not a proper form of request for redress preceding the filing of an Article 138 complaint. An Article 138 complaint based on a denial of a request to set aside an NJP in essence is a collateral attack on the NJP. Consequently, it would be an improper subject of a complaint per section 0304 of reference (b) and the complaint could have been determined to be defective on that basis as well by the

Employee 1 displayed hostile and unfair treatment towards Employee 2 based on the category to which Employee 1 belonged, by using racial slurs. Employee 1 demonstrated a form of workplace discrimination, which included