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

--------------------------------------