Laserfiche WebLink
Page 4 of 6 <br /> Issues & Evidence Table <br /> 2012-2013 Grand Jury Case # 0311 <br /> Prepared:.1.1/2912013 _ <br /> Issue/Finding Complainant Response Example of evidence to support claim <br /> 1.0 - Sexual Disagree: Please see comments on Available witness testimony <br /> Harassment Page 1 <br /> 2.0 Hostile Work Disagree: <br /> Environment <br /> 1. 1 have documentation for over 50 Available witness testimony to support each <br /> - unfounded in incidents of harassment by my co- of the responses. <br /> Grand Jury workers and various members of <br /> report supervisors/management. Documentation of hostile events. over a <br /> period of several months, e.g. the picture 1 <br /> 2. The Grand Jury found that have of a snake on top of my work truck left <br /> sexual harassment did occur. The by a coworker to scare and intimidate me <br /> District's own policy states that <br /> sexual harassment constitutes a Grand Jury findings that the District did not <br /> hostile work environment (Policy # properly investigate the sexual harassment <br /> 2230) and that it was conducted by a Supervisor. <br /> Inaction provided an environment for the <br /> 3. Although the district advised the activity to continue <br /> Grand Jury I was denied chemicals <br /> because they were being saved for Documentation of management retaliation <br /> later in the year, they were readily against me for supporting the complaint <br /> given to others during that period. <br /> 2.0 Management Disagree: <br /> Retaliation- <br /> unfounded in 1. Upon filing my whistle-blower Employee timesheets <br /> Grand Jury report complaint, I was immediately <br /> changed to a more difficult work Correspondence with the district asking for <br /> region in which I had no additional help <br /> experience. I was refused <br /> guidance and additional training Copies of my annual reviews <br /> when I asked for it. This created an <br /> unsafe work environment. Documentation of supervisor telling me <br /> they "can't get involved"with employees <br /> 2. The district states I requested harassing me <br /> these work region <br /> changes, which is untrue. Per the District documentation of other employees <br /> district's policy, the harasser is the being offered modified duty after an injury, <br /> one who is supposed to be which I was not offered. <br /> relocated. <br /> Documentation and witness testimony <br /> 3. From 2004-2008, my supporting my assertion of harassment <br /> performance reviews conducted by fellow employees and <br /> were "Satisfactory". Once I filed supervisors, then condoned by higher <br /> complaints, these contained management <br /> negative comments. <br /> Letter dated November 19, 2013, advising <br /> 4.The district failed to keep my that no modified duty is currently available <br /> 12/20/2013 <br />