RACIAL HARASSMENT AND REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IN THE POST OFFICE BY AFRICAN AMERICANS;
RACISM AND RACIAL HATE IS NOT ONLY SHARED BY WHITES ANYMORE IT HAS MANIFESTED IN OTHER CULTURES PARTICULARLY BY MEMBERS OF THE BLACK COMMUNITY WHO HAPPEN TO SHARE THE SAME HATE THEY HAVE FOR THEMSELVES AS IT IS PERPETRATED ON OTHER INNOCENT AFRICAN AMERICANS.
THE DEMOCRATIC MACHINE FOR YEARS ON RECRUITED AND APPOINTED BLACKS TO JUDGE SHIPS SCHOOL BOARDS ETC WHO WOULD SELL OUT THEIR ETHNIC GROUPS DOING WHATEVER THEY ARE TOLD SO AS TO PROTECT THE DEMOCRATS INVOLVEMENT ENFORCING "JIM CROW LAWS"
MANY BLACKS WHO ARE LIVING IN ALTERNATIVE SEXUAL LIFESTYLES AND ARE A PART OF SORORITIES AND FRATERNITIES ARE USING THIS HATE TO THEIR ADVANTAGE KNOWING THEY WOULD NOT BE ADMONISHED FOR KILLING THEIR OWN ETHNIC GROUP BECAUSE IT IS SOCIALLY ACCEPTED IN A CITY RACIST AS CHICAGO.
MANY OF THE DEMOCRATIC BLACKS WHO HAVE ASCENDED TO POWER ON THE FEDERAL SIDE AT THE POST OFFICE IS EXERCISING THE SAME LEVEL OF RACIAL HATRED EXERCISED ON THE CITY, COUNTY AND STATE LEVELS AT THE POST OFFICE.
THE SAD REALITY IS ONLY WHEN A TRAGEDY OR A PERSON GOES POSTAL BEHIND THESE EVENTS WHEN INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE AFFECTED IS THE ONLY TIME SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN.
DR MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. IS PROBABLY TURNING OVER IN HIS GRAVE
IF PRESIDENT TRUMP CAN TERMINATE FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY FOR WHATEVER REASON BEING ALLEGED HOW IN THE HELL CAN ANYONE IN THIS COMPLAINT HAVE A JOB AFTER AN INVESTIGATION DEMONSTRATING THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN THESE TYPE OF CRIMINAL ACTS?
MORE THAN THAT HOW CAN ANY JUDGE IN CHICAGO TAKING PART IN TREASON , TRESPASS UPON THE LAWS REMAIN ON THE BENCH?
NEEOISO
US POSTAL SERVICE
PO BOX 21979
TAMPA FL 33622-1979
T. R.
V.
EEO Case No 4J-606-0061-17
4J-606-0084-16
Chicago District Post
Office
COMPLAINT
OF COROBARATING DOCUMENTS VALIDATING RETALIATORY HARRASSMENT REVERSE
DISCRIMINATION SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION DISPARATE CONDITIONS AT THE WORK-PLACE
HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT ALTERING EMPLOYEES TIME & COVER-UP CONSPIRACY
A-
Complainant a United States Citizen, Federal
Postal Supervisor, hereby
Respectfully shows this Administrative Body
with corroboration Directed Evidence of the aforementioned violations and
affidavit the noted reasons why this matter should be within this court’s
Jurisdiction; {Pursuant to (A) Color (Title V11 of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)
(B) Race (Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1981)
Reverse
Racial Discrimination, Reverse Racial
Retaliation, Reverse Racial Hatred, Reverse Racial Oppression, Reverse Sexual
Discrimination, Civil Rights Violations, and Disparate Treatment on the basis
of race and sex, color or national origin (42 U.S.C. 1981).
This court has Jurisdiction over the statutory
violation alleged as conferred as follows: over Title V11 claims by U.S.C. {1331, 28 U.S.C. {1343 (a) (3), and 42
U.S.C. {2000e-5 (F) (3); over 42 U.S.C. {1981 and {1983 by 42 U.S.C. {1988;
over the A.D.E.A. by 42 U.S.C. {12117}.
This Administrative body has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1343
and 1367.
1.)
Complainant has
due-diligently notified ADR Specialist within the 45 day EEO counseling period
via email, hereto attached, Notice of Right to file Individual Complaint:
2.) That
said EEO ADR Specialist erroneously
stated in Pars. 5 and 6 on uncited dates “You were given investigative interviews”
“Management breached the settlement agreement et al.”
U. S Sup Court Digest 24(1) General
Conspiracy
U.S. 2003. Essence of a conspiracy
is an agreement to commit an unlawful act.—U.S. v. Jimenez Rocio, 123 S. Ct.
819, 537 U.S. 270, 154 L.Ed.2d 744, on remand 371F.3d 1093
Agreement to commit an unlawful act, which
constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil that exist and be
punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues.-Id.
Conspiracy poses a threat to the public
over and above the threat of the commission of the relevant substantive crime,
both because the combination in crime makes more likely the commission of other
crimes and because it decreases the part from their path of criminality.-Id.
3.)
Complainant has submitted a plethora of documents of
Directed Evidence of Disparate Conditions in Employment, Reverse
Discrimination, and Hostile Work-Environment et al.
A- That ADR Specialist a African American is allegedly using her position and
influence to cover-up all of other African American women in management
complicit in violations of Employment practices and other criminal acts;
B- Complainant
has suffered severe emotional stress from the aforementioned acts ignored by
all managers and other competent personnel; moreover, in that because
Complainant is an African American and said acts are perpetrated by the same
ethnic individuals validating Reverse Discrimination;
C- Black
on Black crime is a norm and systematically accepted and in many instances
known in Chicago aka “Chiraq” many blacks with so much self –hate for
themselves set out to destroy or kill those who look just like them not fearing
any reprisals from the laws;
D- Complainant
has been Bullied, intimidated, berated, humiliated and harassed in ways
unimaginable filed two Post office Police Reports and tried filing an Emergency
Order of Protection before an African American Judge Judith C. Rice who DENIED
Complainants Petition citing she had no jurisdiction she had to take this
matter to her union;
E- The
judge ignored the fact Complainant was in fear of her safety on the job and
possibly her life in that the judge stated, “she
could not issue a no stalking order against Danita because she is your Boss and
you all have to work together”
F- Complainant
was so distressed and discombobulated, she did not want to argue with the judge
because she had filed two documents, a Petition for Independent Order of
Protection and a Petition for Stalking No Contact Order and could not
understand why the judge only dwelled on the Petition for Stalking;
G- Post office managers seems to allegedly use
their positions and authority as rogue terrorist or gang members violating all
anti-violence policies and Complainants Civil rights to bully intimidate or
control any person who do not submit to their demands;
4.)
That because Complainant spoke up and did not coward
down to any woman in authority or accept any advances of them allegedly having
an alternative sexual lifestyle not one person in authority opened their mouths
denouncing the draconian acts levied at the Complainant because they were
silent participants condoning all acts;
5.)
Postal Service Supervisor AND Manager Guilty of Abuse An
Arbitration That Took A Stand Against Workplace Bullying: NALC Case No. GTS 2348, Nov. 1, 2000
The following text was adapted by WBI from the original
Decision and Award document written by Bernice L. Fields, Arbitrator.
Significant statements have been excerpted directly (and contained in quotations)
to demonstrate the arbitrator's reasoning in her own words. A privacy agreement
exists between the Regional NALC and the USPS that prohibits the disclosure of
names of the parties. WBTI has also deleted references the specific Post
Office, the site of the incident.
6.)
The sad reality is that a Circuit Court judge embraced
the same doctrine that the Arbitrator admonished in her ruling on the
aforementioned matter, causing severe emotional distress to the Complainant
when she denied her Emergency Order of Protection;
7.)
"(The manager's) statement was very disturbing
because it shows that the Postal Service believes that unless the level of
violence reaches the place where armed police officers are necessary to
disengage the parties, the dispute is trivial and that no violence has
occurred. The (city) Post Office has a complete misunderstanding of what
constitutes violence in the workplace. An atmosphere where a supervisor
shouting abusive, demeaning and humiliating comments to a worker is a common,
everyday occurrence is exactly the atmosphere the (anti-violence policy) was
issued to eliminate. It appears that in the (the city's) Post Office custom is
stronger than law because despite the (anti-violence policy) and the
Postmaster's 1997 renewed pledge to adhere scrupulously to the (anti-violence
policy's) provisions, neither (the supervisor nor his Manager made even
colorable compliance with the (anti-violence policy's) mandate to have zero
tolerance for harassment, intimidation, and or bullying behavior.
Violence in the workplace begins long before fists
fly, or lethal weapons extinguish lives. Where resentment and aggression
routinely displace cooperation and communication, violence has occurred. Such
violence surfaces as threats, intimidation, harassment, and sub-lethal
assault... The (anti-violence policy) is intended to reach and to correct
emotional violence as well as actual physical attacks..."
8.) On
May 2, 2016, A Discrimination
Complaint was filed against manager, case #4J-606-0084-16.
9.)
Said Managers Title is Manager Customer Services a Grade EAS 22, pursuant to the
Managers Guide to Understanding, Investigating and Preventing Harassment, Dec.
2016, Manager S. and other Managers with Notice and knowledge of the
foregoing acts have violated every aspect of the anti-violence policies
relating to postal protocol and procedures;
10.)
That said pay salary for the aforementioned position is
$63,374.00-$104,946.00 and this is how said Managers making this type of money
treat said Complainant;
VOL I CITED DOCUMENTS OF DIRECTED EVIDENCE
11.)
This matter stems from ongoing issues of Reverse
Discrimination Bulliness and intimidating tactics resulting from a plethora of
factors resulting from work place violence;
A- In
Jan. 2016, a complaint was lodged
against AM Supervisor , resulting from the fact, he left mail on
the work room floor that did not go out with the mail carriers, this was
reported to acting Customer Service Operating Manager, ()
B- Hereto
attached, Vol 1, cited dates from May 26, 2016 thru August 3, 2016 complaining of the noted issues mentioned in this
document;
C- May 25, 2016, email from (Manager) scheduling Complainant without proper notice;
D- May 26, 2016, email from Complainant
who informed the Manager of Supervisor failing to adhere to the
responsibilities of her position and her inability to perform the 3:00am
schedule;
E- May 26, 2016, email from Complainant
reiterating the fact they could not work that schedule and reminding the
Manager that another supervisor was in fact the Supervisor to work the 3:30am schedule.
Manager ignored Complainants issue engaged in Disparate Conditions at the work
place forcing Complainant to work in a time slot not of her choice;
F- May 27, 2016, email from Complainant
reminding the Manager that, she successfully bided on another shift 7:30 am -
4:30 pm, Manager with vexatious regard to Postal Policies regarding Equal
Opportunity within the workplace circumvented Federal laws and regulations
demanded Complainant to report to work in another supervisor time slot;
G- May 27, 2016, email from Complainant to
Manager insisting her inability to work the 3:00 am schedule and reminder her
again of a Supervisor already assigned in the time slot, which Manager
ignored and continuously engaged in Discriminatory practices at the work-place,
and Disparate Conditions of employment;
H- June 6, 2016, email from Complainant to
Manager ascertaining job description, Manager kept changing her schedule demonstrating
on going harassment working in a hostile environment;
I- June 10, 2016, email from Complainant
to Manager repeatedly complaining of being subjected to Disparate Conditions of
employment, in that, another supervisor was scheduled to report to work at 3:00 am
because she didn’t like the reporting time, Manager unlawfully manipulated the
schedule to allow another supervisor to report on Complainant’s scheduled reporting time
and incur differential pay from that time shift;
J- June 20, 2016, email from Manager
() to Complainant regarding documentation covering her absences.
Complainant rebutted the harassing email by informing the Manager she was in
the hospital and had been stressed out how the Manager berated and humiliated
her in front of employees;
K- Complainant
has been many times felt uncomfortable around said Manager because she would
stare at the Complainant as if she was a man in a very uncomfortable manner,
and get in her personal space as if to provoke Complainant in some type of
altercation where Complainant had to avoid her and remain in public view at all
times in the event she had to defend herself from unwanted advances or hostile
attempts;
L-
June 23,
2016, Complainant received a directive to report to Manager office, she
stated, she wanted Complainant to report to work for 10 hours starting at
8:30am, it was explained to her that, she could not work that schedule, due to
other plans, Manager got an attitude in unprofessional manner, stated in an
intimidating manner, “You are failing to
follow instructions” Complainants reply, “No, I am not failing to follow instructions, I just won’t be able to
do it”
M- July 8, 2016, email from Complainant to
Manager regarding continuous harassment as Manager would stalk Complainant
fabricate allegations of her not performing tasks assigned to her when in fact,
Complainant had exhausted the duties directed upon her;
N- July 26, 2016, email from Complainant
to Manager regarding an employee where the employee has
demonstrated inappropriate behavior on the work room floor further
demonstrating working in a hostile environment because the Manager never
addressed the issues lodged in the email complaint;
O- July 18, 2016, Manager levied a Bogus
write-up at the Complainant allegedly for not yielding or accepting any
unwanted advances; the Charge FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS
A- SUPERVISOR
SCHEDULES for week of July 16-22,
2016, July 23-29, 2016 and July 30-August 5, 2016 all
demonstrating Complainant was to report to work at 7:50-16:50 and Supervisor was to report to work at 3:00am
B- July 2016, Complainant was in the
hospital for 2 days, Manager was aware of this because requested FMLA
Complainant learned she never put the time in correctly and AWOL the
Complainant for absent without leave further demonstrating Reverse
Discrimination, Harassment et al.
C-
P- August 3, 2016, email from Complainant
to Manager over Manager in question regarding a status update, she
never replied to this email;
Q- August 4, 2016, Manager levied another
Bogus write-up at the Complainant for the same reasons noted in Par. O;
R- August 5, 2016, Choice Position
Sheet identifying Complainants position as that of Delivery this document is
the basis of Managers engaging in an unlawful Labor Relations violation
exercising a plethora of Disparate Conditions manipulating her schedule and
reporting times so as to show favor to the other women;
VOLUME II BREACH OF AGREEMENT/RETALIATION ET AL.
CITED DOCUMENTS OF DIRECTED
EVIDENCE
1.)
That Mediation agreement proved ineffective and incited
the Managers to conspire and ignore all Discriminatory, Reverse Discriminatory
issues and further promoted Disparate Conditions at the work-place keeping
Complainant in a Hostile environment due to parties being African American and
because Complainant was in fact an African American women no one addressed any
of the issues because of this fact;
2.)
Upon returning back into the Hostile environment from
working a detail January 9, 2017,
email from Complainant to (Manager) and (Manager)
detailing and complaining of her position being changed unlawfully, where she
has worked successfully in the same position for almost 3 years, August 2014;
3.)
January 9, 2017,
email to Complainant where female Manager requested Complainant to meet
her to discuss her issues;
4.)
On Monday January
9, 2017, I forwarded an email complaint to Managers complaining of the harassment regarding Manager in question, she has continuously lodged at me and the fact, she changed my schedule
from 7:30am to 3:00am, this was not picked by me and this was another specific
area in violation of the breach;
A- I
was informed by another female Manager who stated, “Whether,
I participated in the selection of my choice it was going to happen anyway”!
B- I
requested a form 50 of my job status being changed, they informed me it was in
Web coin.
C- When,
I requested to see the signature of the paper work where African American male, Manager
of Personnel signing off on it, Manager told me to call him yourself and get
it.
D- My
reply seeing that you are the manager if everything was done legally per post
office procedures and labor laws you should have a signature? She reiterated
call him yourself!
5.)
That on Jan. 9,
2017, Manager stated in front of all female supervisors “You wanted this, this way
do you want me to discuss this in front of everyone”? My reply, “that this is a breach of my
confidentiality” this altercation erupted when, I requested documentation
stating my time had changed, which she never provided.
6.)
That Manager on many occasions tried getting in Complainants
face staring at her uncomfortably, Complainant had to walk away, trying to
avoid a physical altercation but she on many occasions continued to berate her
on the work room floor and at the supervisors desk;
A- Complainant
always felt as if Manager was trying to provoke her into a violent
episode with her bullying tactics in that she told her, “You “haven’t got that yet, I can do whatever, I want and whenever, I want” in an arrogant untouchable
manner.
7.)
January 10, 2017,
email from another Manager regarding a station visit at 10:00am;
A- Manager met the Complainant in the Supervisors office at Post Office building and verbally agreed to send Complainant to a South side Station, she
asked, if she was willing to go? Complainant said yes, her reply, was that she
have to talk to the Manager of the South side location;
B- Complainant
have not received any other communication regarding this matter;
8.)
January 13, 2017,
2 emails from Complainant, to Manager () the 1:24pm email rebutted
the allegations levied at Complainant regarding parcels on the floor;
9.) January 13, 2017, notes from
Complainant regarding Manager demonstrating how she is continuously harassed
and that no other supervisor has been subjected to unequal conditions in
employment, in that, Manager interrupted Complainant from doing her duties
complaining that, “You need to make sure
all your mail is up before doing a PDI”
A- Manager
interrupted an Investigative Interview that Complainant was initiating in the
supervisors office complying with Managers directive; she later used this
tactic to harass the Complainant when there was another Supervisor on the floor
interfering with her duties admonishing an employee;
10.)
January 13, 2017,
email from Complainant to another Manager regarding the Supervisor Schedule;
11.)
January 13, 2017,
email from Complainant to Manager in question regarding her complying with responsibilities forwarded to Manager;
12.)
January 13, 2017,
email from Complainant to Manager regarding mail on the floor;
13.)
January 13, 2017,
consistent communication of emails to Manager rebutting mail on the floor
and further compliance of her duties;
A- Manager further demonstrated a hostile work place by creating a division between
employees and supervisors;
14.)
January 24, 2017,
notes from Complainant demonstrating how Manager left personal document 3971 on
the counter for public perusal, Complainant retrieved the document and placed it
on Managers desk, Manager became belligerent and hostile demanded
Complainant place it in her hands in a very unprofessional manner, insisted
Complainant come into her office when she refused, Manager made threats to
Complainant that she was going to call her boss;
15.)
February 7, 2017,
notes from Complainant demonstrating how Manager has been persistent trying to
lure Complainant into her office with frivolous directives trying to justify
communication;
16.)
February 10,
2017, notes from Complainant demonstrating Manager verbally changing
her job classification from delivery to mail processing, demonstrating
Disparate Conditions at the work place no other supervisor ever had their
classifications changed by the Manager;
17.)
February 15,
2017, notes from Complainant demonstrating continuous harassment and
reverse discriminatory practices of Manager, in that, she became irate
because information was sent to the Postmaster, where she was
changing the normal protocol on how information had been communicated or sent;
A- Manager insisted that Complainant come in on a non-scheduled day to work the
Amazon (Sunday & Monday) when she declined because of other commitments,
Manager stated it was on the schedule for her to come in that was never posted;
furthermore, no Supervisor ever had to report two off days straight working the
Amazon schedule.
B- Complainant
sent an email to Manager reiterating the fact, she would not be in on
the Sunday schedule her off day because she was going to be out of town;
C- Manager sent an email to Complainant and other Supervisors, stating, “redacted is the Postmaster do not send union
request to her send to her secretary with the requested
documentation. Ensure I am copied” et al.
D- Manager sent an email to Complainant demonstrating hostility Disparate
Conditions of Employment, intimidation stated in the email, “You are scheduled to work try switching
with your co-worker. The schedule will not be revised”
E- Manager unlawfully prepared a schedule placing Complainant on the schedule Feb. 15, 2017 knowing the Complainant
was not going to be in town;
F- February 18, 2017 schedule prepared by
Manager; the schedule on its face demonstrates Manager is falsifying time and
altering time records to cover-up Supervisor is to report to work at 3:00am but
she is on the schedule as reporting to work at 7:00am in Complainants time
schedule, further verifying Reverse Discrimination, Disparate Conditions of
Employment et al.
18.)
Manager on Feb. 21st, told Complainant to report
to a different work location on her off day which is a Sunday and was notified
via email which is an involuntary assignment and she did not receive Notice 3
weeks prior per Mediation Agreement, demonstrates Mediation is a smoke screen
allowing Management to harass and retaliate upon hard working employees like
the Complainant in any way they see fit;
A- Manager sent an email to Complainant, February
21, 2017 for an Investigative Interview;
B- Manager has been allowed with upper level Management’s approval to further
Retaliate, Discriminate exercise Hostility at the work place continue Disparate
conditions at the Complainant due to her skin color, the consensus is that
because this is black on black crimes it will go ignored as other crimes on the
South and West sides of Chicago;
C- Manager constantly uses investigative interview processes as one of her many
ways of harassing Complainant, “the Manager never interviews other EAS
supervisors”.
D- Manager further demonstrated Hostile animus Retaliation at the Complainant, in
that, she presented to her a document titled Letter of Warning and stated, “I am issuing you this Letter of Concern et
al.” Hereto attached, March 24, 2017,
document;
E- Complainant
signed the document not as an admission of guilt but due to Overwhelming
Emotional Stress that said manager had subjected her to on a daily basis it
was a deterrent hoping, she would leave her alone until she was rescued or
removed from such a violent work environment;
19.)
That someone allegedly notified Manager or a Postal employee in
authority that Complainant was at 555 West Harrison trying to obtain an
Emergency Order of Protection on her, in that said Manager made a hostile act
of aggression at the Complainant by engaging in a Disparate Act by
changing her lunch schedule Tuesday April
11, 2017, she reported to work at 3am and had to take a lunch at 7am at the
very peak when mail had to be dispatched to the carriers so that customers
could receive their mail in a timely manner;
A- Monday
Complainant was scheduled to report to lunch from 10:00-11:00am;
B- That
said Manager did not change no other female employees lunch schedule making it
clear to the Complainant in her actions she and her fraternal sisters are
untouchable, in that a new Breed of Outlaws have taking seize of the
Post Office in Chicago;
C- April 11, 2017 email from Complainant
notifying her of lunch schedule change;
D- April 10, 2017, email from Manager
Regarding the letter of warning/letter of concern not sure;
E- April 10, 2017, email Complainant
states, “At this stage, I am considering
any and all action to be a form of retaliatory harassment”
20.)
It was Complainants understanding per the agreement of African American female Managers who went to meet with the Postmaster regarding granting Complainant a lateral removing her from the hostile
environment, Manaer informed Union Rep and Complainant, the
Postmaster was not granting Complainant a lateral (meaning Complainant had to
stay at the same pay grade and not to go to another Post Office to work
removing her from the hostile environment away from Manager subject of the complaint).
A- This
was quite confusing because employees had exceptions made for them to be
removed from one postal station to another who were not in hostile environments;
B- March 6, 2017, Manager emailed
Complainant in that Complainant never received any forms from the Manager and
have no idea what she was talking about the only who sent Complainant regarding
any harassment was (ADR Specialist) in EEO;
C- March 6, 2017, Manager emailed
Complainant and other Supervisors a 3 week schedule this is the second time she
has did this deliberately violating the agreement;
D- March 6, 2017, Manager made it
clear in her schedule allowing Supervisor on a walk team detail for
three weeks keeping Complainant in a hostile environment so as to continuously
harass her at will;
E- It
was Complainants understanding, she was not released to work at another south side station when they were in desperate need of certified supervisors because
there was no one to relieve the Complainant at her station, in that another African American female Manager asked Complainant if she didn’t mind coming to their station
because they needed the help in February
2017;
F- Manager in her quest to harass the Complainant denied her the right to leave a
hostile environment to another south side station which was requested because of a lack of EAS 17 personnel;
G- Manager could have stood up another employee as an Acting Supervisor to replace the
Complainant but did not, stating she could not stand up the employee;
H- Manager is now standing up the employee as a Acting 204B Supervisor at station in training;
I- Manager has accomplished her goal of noticeable hostility by adding more
responsibilities on the Complainant demonstrating Reverse Discrimination, Disparate Conditions in Employment with no
regard to Federal Labor Practices or
Postal Procedures in Employment et
al. because the women and personnel she was subordinate to was protecting her;
J-
March 10,
2017, Manager violated not only FMLA laws but she falsified
the 3971 form of 2016 to current by
stating unscheduled leave when it was FMLA to further retaliate against the
Complainant knowing she was in the
hospital via a text and medical documentation;
K- March 10, 2017, Manager falsified
the 3971 which states: WARNING: The furnishing of false information on this
form may result in a fine of not more than $10,000.00 or imprisonment of not
more than 5 years or both {18 U.S.C. 1001};
L- March 10, 2017, Manager did a
attendance review off of unlawful entries knowing the recording of Complainants
leave in that an Auditor needs to inspect her records so as to ascertain other
unlawful recordings;
21.)
Complainant reiterated each violation noted in
the agreement and other areas of discrimination and made it very clear to
Manager how uncomfortable and stressed out this matter has made her and
the Union Rep there has not been any resolution and will not be
resolved until a judge with jurisdiction invoke his or her authority in this
matter;
A- Considering the Postal policy is a ZERO TOLERANCE in the work-place
where management has had to take mandatory classes apprising all management
personnel of retaliation and or whistleblowing, bullying etc. but no one seems
to be taking heed to this particular directive.
22.)
Pursuant to Par
6 of Vol. II Manager made
an accurate admission “You “haven’t
got that yet, I can do whatever, I want and whenever, I want”
It is apparent terrorism is under a
different ethnicity in the Chicago, District Post Office.
HONZAWA
v. HONZAWA
309 A.D.2d 629
(2003)
766 N.Y.S.2d 29
MITSUHIRO
HONZAWA et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. HIROKUNI HONZAWA et al.,
Appellants-Respondents, et al., Defendants. MITSUHIRO HONZAWA et al., Respondents,
v. HIROKUNI HONZAWA et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Appellate
Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Decided October
21, 2003.
While the evidence is
therefore sufficient to sustain a cause of action for abuse of process (see
Curiano v Suozzi, 63 N.Y.2d 113, 116 [1984]), this claim arises out of the same conduct as the
malicious prosecution cause of action, and plaintiffs sought identical damages under
their respective theories. While the two causes of action can be pleaded in the
alternative, only a single recovery is available (see Board of Educ. of
Farmingdale Union Free School Dist. v Farmingdale Classroom Teachers Assn., 38 N.Y.2d 397, 406 [1975]).
Reprehensible conduct warrants the award of punitive damages (BMW
of N. Am., Inc. v Gore,517 U.S. 559,
575 [1996]; see also State
Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Campbell, 538 U.S. 408,
___, 123 S. Ct. 1513, 1519, 1520 [2003]; Cooper
Indus. v Leatherman Tool Group, 532 U.S. 424,
434-435 [2001]).
"The
purpose of punitive damages is solely to punish the offender and to deter
similar conduct on the part of others" (Zurich Ins. Co. v Shearson
Lehman Hutton, 84
N.Y.2d 309, 316 [1994]), a more substantial penalty than $10 million is
appropriate.
In West v. Gipson,
527 U. S. 212 (1999) In
1991, Congress amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to permit
victims of intentional employment discrimination, whether within the private
sector or the federal government, to recover compensatory damages. Thereafter,
Michael Gibson filed a complaint with the Department of Veterans Affairs,
alleging that the Department had discriminated against him by denying him a
promotion on the basis of his gender. The Department found against Gibson.
Afterwards, however, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) awarded
Gibson the promotion plus back pay. Later Gibson filed suit, in the District
Court, seeking compensatory damages and a court order for the Department to
comply with the EEOC's order. Subsequently, the Department voluntarily complied
with the EEOC's order, but it opposed Gibson's claim for compensatory damages.
Ultimately, the District Court dismissed Gibson's complaint. On appeal, the
Department supported the District Court's dismissal with the argument that
Gibson had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in respect to his
compensatory damages claim; therefore, he could not bring that claim in court.
In reversing, the Court of Appeals rejected the Department's argument. The
court viewed the EEOC as lacking the legal power necessary to award
compensatory damages. Consequently, there was no administrative remedy to
exhaust.
In a
5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the Court held that the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission possess the legal authority to require
federal agencies to pay compensatory damages when they discriminate in
violation of Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,
writing for the dissenting minority, expressed the view that that the EEOC
could not have awarded compensatory damages against the United States under
Title VII because the statute did not authorize such awards in explicit terms.
Therefore, according to Justice Kennedy, it did not provide the required waiver
of the United States' sovereign immunity
Complainant is
seeking Punitive Damages of $959, 000.00 due to Emotional Distress Depression
and suffering resulting to now taking medication;
That because of the heinous acts Plaintiff have been harmed by said Civil
Rights Violations and no one objected to said assertions or addressed the harm
she experienced working in a Hostile environment, Plaintiff is seeking $ 959,00.00 as punitive damages; Smith
v. Wade,
461 U.S. 30, 35, 103 S. Ct. 1625, 1629, 75 L Ed 2d 632 (1983) Justice Brennen “The threshold standard for
allowing punitive damages for reckless or callous indifference applies even in
a case, such as here, where the underlying standard of liability for
compensatory damages because is also one of recklessness. There is no merit to
petitioner’s contention that actual malicious intent should be the standard for
punitive damages because the deterrent purposes of such damages would be served
only if the threshold for those damages is higher in every case than the
underlying standard for liability in the first instance. The common-law rule is
otherwise, and there is no reason to depart from the common-law rule in the
context of {1983}”
Complainant is
seeking compensatory damages of $1000.00 a day for being forced to work in a
hostile work environment since the first day complained of this matter March
2016;
Complainant is
requesting that a Petition for Rule to Show Cause be imposed on parties
complicit in said “Organized
Conspiracy” due to the elaborate conspiracies of Management harassing and Discriminating individuals like
the Complainant for complaining and reporting unlawful labor practices so as to
purge any and all Defendants from Federal employment prohibiting them access to
any pensions;
Complainant is
requesting a Judge to intervene and invoke jurisdiction because being in a
Union Shop reporting these unlawful events because certain Union Officials have
demonstrated a conflict of interests, due to alleged relations with Managers
and or Supervisors and closing their eyes so as to receive alleged favors as
demonstrated in this matter where time and schedules are manipulated unlawfully;
Complainant is
requesting a Judge to intervene and invoke jurisdiction because as a
Heterosexual African American women working in a subordinate capacity under
certain African American women they don’t accept or respect individuals not
embracing their sexual alternative lifestyles and this document
demonstrates the chaotic nature a
Heterosexual person have to endure under alleged authority;
Complainant is
requesting that the United States Attorney General investigate this matter to
determine if a Circuit Court judge used her power and influence to assist said
Defendants for what political purpose or gain;
Complainant
respectfully requests this Honorable Court the right to amend said Complaint so
as to cure any defects;
No person in spite of their sexuality or skin color should
be subjected to any of these hostile events, in that Complainant stated, said
experience made her feel as if she was being raped screaming for help as
everyone turned on a deaf ear and backs closing their eyes to the injustices
perpetrated at her.
Respectfully Submitted,
-------------------------------
NEEOISO
US POSTAL SERVICE
PO BOX 21979
TAMPA FL 33622-1979
T. R.
v.
EEO Case No 4J-606-0061-17
4J-606-0084-16
Chicago District Post
Office
EXHIBIT LIST
1.)
March 30, 2017, Notice of Right to
File an Individual Complaint. 3 pages.
2.)
April 10, 2017,
Order Denying Order of Protection 17
OP 72209 and Stalking Petition against Manager . 11 pages.
3.)
July 15, 2016,
Agreement to Mediate. 5 pages.
4.)
November 22,
2016, Complainant filed her Breach, one page.
5.)
Volume 1
Emails, write-ups, Supervisor schedules, 20 pages.
6.)
Volume II
Choice Position Sheet, emails write-ups, 33 pages.
Respectfully Submitted,
NEEOISO
US POSTAL SERVICE
PO
BOX 21979
TAMPA FL 33622-1979
T.R.
V. EEO Case No 4J-606-0061-17
4J-606-0084-16
Chicago District Post
Office
AFFIDAVIT
I l, files herewith her
affidavit as required by Title 28, United States Code:
I Pro Se being duly sworn on
oath states that, I have caused the aforementioned Complaint and all
attachments accompanying said Complaint, to the NEEOISO via Chicago, Postal
delivery April 13, 2017, the undersigned certifies that the statements set
forth in this instrument are true
and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and
belief and as to such matters, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he
verily believes the same to be true.
Respectfully Submitted
Notary
--------------------------------------
