ࡱ>    !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root EntryZ O20X_CONTENTS CompObjVSPELLING(o work. So in an effort to check if it was a misunderstanding on my part I told her "if it was warm out I might do it, but I am not going to ride to work in the cold for nothing". Instead of indicating that I misunderstood the intended punishment, she merely said "I understand". I told her that she shouldn't take any actions which might affect her job security. And then I asked her if she would be a witness at the appeal. She seemed very agreeable and even said "Of course. I want to be there.". She indicated that I should call the night before the hearing was to convene and remind her. Now things were starting to look up! For the next two weeks I felt great. But when I called Pam the night before the hearing, she indicated that someone had informed her that if she made an appearance at the hearing it would mean the loss of her job. It was conveniently to late to get a subpoena mandating her appearance. Even if Pam wasn't going to be there, I still felt confident because 'the truth shall set you free'. I entered the hearing confident of my position, but willing to accept the consequences if I was in the wrong. Both sides told their story and I was still feeling confident. That is until Betty, the same person that had told me "As it stands now, you're fired", told the unemployment tribunal "firing Ron was never considered". I was stunned to say the least! I hate to think that Pam had intentionally set me up for a fall by indicating she would be there of her own accord. Some people might think I had been outwitted in that during the two week period after Pam agreed to testify, I didn't feel the need to get a subpoena for her because she had told me she wanted to be there. That thought never crossed my mind in 1985, especially concerning Pam, bCHNKWKS TEXTTEXT FDPPFDPPFDPPFDPPFDPCFDPCSTSHSTSHSTSHSTSHDSYIDSYIDSGP SGP &INK INK *BTEPPLC . BTECPLC NFONTFONTf\STRSPLC :PRNTWNPRFRAMFRAMTITLTITL.DOP DOP Hod the intended punishment, she mere THE BATTLE BEGINS About a year prior, a long time Acme employee had transferred into programming. Although she had taken a couple of programming classes at the community college, her lack of practical experience was clearly evident. Her programs became the butt of many jokes as an example of 'how not to'. After a while she left Acme and got a job programming somewhere else in Las Vegas. When word got back to us that she had lost her new job and was receiving unemployment compensation, I commented that it wasn't fair for someone to receive unemployment compensation after losing a job due to incompetence. Someone at Acme apparently misunderstood my remark. When I applied for said compensation, in an effort to be receiving some income while searching for another job, Acme's management saw to it that my request was turned down. Their claim was that I refused to accept a two week suspension for an 'affront to a senior official of the company'. Since I was so self-conscious about my speech and appearance, they probably thought that I would accept their action rather then put myself up for public scrutiny. This time they were wrong! I filed an appeal to the rejection which included a thumbnail sketch of what had happened. A hearing was set for 2 weeks later. Since the reason for being turned down was Acme's assertion that I had been offered a suspension, it seemed a logical step to bring a witness as to the actual penalty imposed. The next morning I called Pam at home to ask her about being a witness on my behalf. I first expressed my thanks to her and Pete for their attempts on my behalf. The idea of working and receiving no pay was so ludicrous that I half believed it was a misinterpretation on my part. Pam knew that I rode a motorcycle tut I have since reached a new realization about people's integrity and motivation! Since Pam hadn't seen the form Betty tried to get me to sign, the only help she could have been anyway was to testify about the attempt to fire me. But that was counter to the story Acme's management was attempting to concoct so they couldn't allow her to testify. If Pam was really sincere about wanting to testify, why didn't she call me and indicate she wanted to be issued a subpoena? Perhaps she was afraid of having to testify because unlike other Acme representatives, she wouldn't lie for the company. She couldn't have known, but I wouldn't have wanted her to risk losing her job. This was my problem. I don't remember much of the rest of the appeal hearing. This new revelation, that it wasn't going to be a fair fight, caught me totally off-guard. As a result of the tall tale Betty and the other Acme representative told at the appeal hearing, I really didn't have confidence that the ruling would be in my favor. Apparently, at that point in time, Acme's management and I didn't disagree on the facts of the story with one exception. The claim that they offered me a chance to keep my job if I accepted a two-week suspension as penalty for my 'affront' to the VP. They even offered as evidence a form, informing me of the suspension, that I had supposedly refused to sign. Why wasn't I smart enough to keep the form that Betty tried to get me to sign?! Perhaps Pam had seen that form? And Acme's management feared she would reveal Acme's bald-faced lie? In that case, they really couldn't allow her to testify. At the time we faced each other during the appeal of the unemployment decision, Acme's representatives not only didn't express any complaints about my job performance, they instead made it appear that Acme hated to lose me. Their testimony was an attempt to make it appear that I was a bum looking for a 'free ride'. What else could they have been attempting to intimate with their assertion that I quit my job rather then take a two-week vacation without pay? At least if Acme had a different story, and statements from other people, as to what had happened between me and the VP on 1/3/85 or my demeanor at the management update session, it's representatives didn't offer them into evidence at the appeal of the unemployment decision. After leaving the appeal hearing, I drove straight to the office of the Equal Rights Commission. According to newspaper and magazine stories, as well as television news reports, this agency has helped many people in their pursuit of basic rights. Knowing I was born in this country, not only finished high school but had six years of college studies, don't do drugs, and am really a nice guy; it seemed as if I must have basic rights also. In addition, I had started working at age 14. Not a paper route, but hard physical labor in a bagel bakery. I began working 60 hours a week in the bakery after graduation from high school. I also started attending college a couple of weeks after getting out of high school. From 6/71 to 3/75 I attended college full-time, including summer sessions, and continued to hold down a job. In order to have my work hours and school hours be compatible, I was forced to take the minimum number of hours needed to be classified as a full-time student. After leaving the bakery, in 3/72, because the hours interfered with my studies too much, I took a part-time job at a Pizza restaurant. But eventually that turned into a full-time job because I was working part-time at several Las Vegas area outlets of this chain. And all the while I saved my money. I wasn't going to be a burden on society or a sled of rocks that my family had to drag. Not me! The EEOC had helped people that were exposed to sexual or racial harassment in the workplace. It may sound insensitive, or egotistical, but the pain caused a female employee by hearing a dirty joke or an employer's comments about her physical attractiveness really didn't seem that tragic. Even an employer's use of racial slurs, or failure to grant job promotions to minority class members wasn't quite as bad as totally destroying an employee's means of earning a living. The things I heard at the unemployment hearing made me realize I was in danger of losing any moral right to fairness. And I thought that the EEOC could help me protect said right. I intended to charge Acme with forcing me out of my job for having the audacity to stand up for my personal dignity, and also charge Betty with making fun of my speech problems and treating me as if I was a sub-human. Until then, I had pretty much shined on her attempts to humiliate me. After reading my complaint form, the senior representative in the Las Vegas office of the Equal Rights Commission informed me that because I am a white male they would have to try to help me on the basis of my speech disability. Although I didn't really understand why my race or sex was of any import, it seemed logical that the EEOC representative understood the laws better then me. It was the senior representative of the EEOC that suggested my speech classified me as handicapped, and therefore a minority class member. I just wanted the equal rights that should be due any person. But the 'Equal' in 'Equal Rights Commission' apparently doesn't apply to heterosexual white males. After gathering a few more facts, she told me I would receive notice as to the date of a hearing. After a few weeks I received notice that I had won the right to receive unemployment compensation. And the unemployment tribunal soundly criticized Acme for it's action in response to, in their words, 'an unintentional and insignificant act of the claimant in not responding to a senior officials greeting'. I felt ten feet tall. This euphoria continued until I went to the Equal Rights Commission 'fact finding' session. I hadn't really understood the gravity of my action. Unlike at the unemployment compensation hearing, Acme didn't send Betty to plead their case. I'm not really sure why Acme didn't send Betty to defend the company this time. It could have been because this confrontation had a far greater significance. Or it could have been that Acme realized my status before the unemployment compensation tribunal had been greatly enhanced because Betty had a difficult time hiding her disgust with me. This time, three higher level representatives were sent to defend Acme. Even that would have been no problem had I been allowed to speak. But before I entered the meeting, my case worker informed me that I was not to get into a debate with the Acme representatives. I was being allowed to attend the meeting and listen as a courtesy to me. So like a fool, I sat there and listened to their tales of my incompetence. All the while expecting my case worker to ask them why I was there for 5 years if I was so incompetent. Incompetence? At the unemployment compensation hearing, Betty had said that I "was a good worker" and Acme "hated to lose" me. In all fairness, during the EEOC confrontation the Acme representatives didn't use the word 'incompetent' to describe me. They claimed that I was a 'marginal' employee. But their tone and look of disgust made the implication pretty clear. Acme's representatives probably felt use of the word 'incompetent' would be too strong since I worked there 61 months. Although my case worker seemed more interested in letting the Acme representatives berate me then getting at the truth, I didn't speak out. I didn't ask why, after tendering my resignation at my last review, I was promised a promotion if I would stay. Perhaps I had misjudged Acme. Not only had they employed a 'marginal' employee for 61 months, but at one point they had offered me a promotion as an inducement not to resign! What a great employer! Or perhaps it is standard practice to go to such lengths for 'marginal' employees? The Acme representatives admitted that there was an attempt to fire me, but said there was a question of who had authority over me. When one of them admitted that I had answered the VP's question 'yes', but indicated that it "was the way he said it"; I couldn't contain myself any longer. And when I repeatedly attempted to have him clarify what he meant, he would just repeat "the way". I knew that he meant the VP had been treated like a mortal man rather then a God/King. But I couldn't get an intelligent response as to what he meant by 'the way'. Rather then prejudice my case worker against me for failing to follow his instructions not to speak, I let my questions slide. As it turned out, my concern over alienating the case worker was really a waste of effort. For some strange reason, I felt that the steps I had taken to become a productive member of society would count in my favor. Even though my case worker was strangely silent, I don't think that the Equal Rights Commission was afraid of taking on a major corporation like Acme. And just because I am a white, male, heterosexual, honest, college-educated, native-born person surely didn't preclude my receiving help from a government agency. Or did it? After the meeting broke up, my case worker told me to prepare a list of witnesses that could back up my story about Betty's treatment of me. Or witnesses that could testify concerning my job competence. I felt a rush of confidence again. Everyone there knew my abilities and the treatment I received from Betty. Although most of the other data processing staff hid their true feelings out of deference to her position and power, most people didn't really like her because she was cruel to everyone. Although most of the others had to imagine what she said about them behind their backs, I was one of the few that drew comments from her face to face. That was one thing that I never understood. Why was she extra cruel to me? I was her best friend among the programming staff. I didn't like her, but at least she knew that. It wasn't me that gave her the nickname 'Betty Bitch'. One of the people she assumed was her friend did that. After she became the boss of the programming staff and her level of authority seemed to go to her head, she went on a 'power trip'. I felt sorry for her and tried to make allowance for her attitude problem. She was very obese and I thought she was unconsciously getting back at the world for any 'fat' jokes she had endured. I am painfully aware of how cruel people can be. The first witness I called was Ed. This was the person that I felt was one of the few 'real' people at Acme. But after I asked him about testifying on my behalf, he said "Ron, after they got the letter from the Equal Rights Commission there was a staff meeting. They said that anyone who testified against Acme would be terminated." Next I called Pat, who had been my immediate supervisor before Curly. When I started to explain to her the reason I had left Acme, she informed me that Betty had already called and told her. I immediately knew something was wrong. Pat had left Acme in mid 1984. And Betty calling Pat, or vice-versa, for a friendly chat would be more surprising to me then a desert snowstorm in August. Even though I knew it would be pointless, I called a few more people. I didn't mention the staff meeting and neither did they. And they all claimed, for various reasons, that they had never seen Betty do anything wrong. I felt pity, rather then anger, towards them. I lost my job. But they lost any shred of personal dignity in their drive to keep a job which required them to be slaves. I shouldn't have pitied them. As it turned out, personal dignity must not mean much to those people anyway. AN AWAKENING This had to be a bad dream, it couldn't really be happening. Had my life become a total washout? I would have understood and felt it was fair if this had all been caused because I was rude to the VP or called him a filthy name. But the only thing that I did was make the mistake of treating him like a mortal man. My background, working in a bakery and for the Pizza restaurant chain, had not prepared me for dealing with people on this level of society. Having met many medical doctors, college professors, and a U.S. Congressman only served to further skew my view of how people should relate. They all acted like people are people. Therefore when I saw other Acme employees fawn over their superiors, I assumed it was because of their own character flaw and not a job requirement. I found my thoughts wandering back to events that had occurred recently during my tenure with Acme. In early 1984, my supervisor at the time informed me I was being placed on the 'promotion list'. Later that year, a programmer/analyst with a higher job classification then me transferred back into the computer room. A couple of years prior he had transferred from the computer room in an attempt to become a programmer. As he was a long-time Acme employee, his inability to write a computer program was overlooked for two years. But eventually he was given the option of transferring back into a job he could perform or being put out on the street. I entered my annual review meeting in December 1984 assuming a promotion to fill the vacancy would be forthcoming. But instead of a promotion, it was the usual 'satisfactory - eligible for promotion in 1 or 2 years'. I had been receiving that for the last couple of years. Curly said "You never do, but I'm supposed to ask if you have any questions?". I said "No". Then Curly asked "Any comments?". I answered "Let's figure the 31st as my last day.". He must have thought I was making a joke since he was chuckling as he asked "the 31st of what?". I wasn't joking while answering "December. Two weeks.". Curly was visibly upset, and said "Why? What do you mean?". I told him "I've got to get more money if I have to take any more of Betty's crap.". He acknowledged this wasn't the first complaint he had received about her, told me to wait, and went to Betty's office. After returning he said "OK Ron, you'll get your promotion.". And when I informed him that this wasn't a ploy on my part to get an undeserved promotion, He responded "You should have been promoted a long time ago. It just got to be a habit, since you never complained, not to.". Initially, I still intended to resign. I felt stupid for working without a promotion after I deserved one. Apparently qualifications or hard work weren't the key. Promotions were dependent on some other, unexpressed, criteria. After a few hours of thinking about the situation, I decided not to resign my position at Acme. Perhaps at long last I was going someplace in the company. As luck would have it, three weeks later I went to the management update session and my ill-fated meeting with the VP. But I was an optimist. the VP may have shown his power, or something else, but things would work out. This was still only a temporary setback. While drawing unemployment compensation, I was answering want ads in the local newspapers confident that my 5 years with Acme would carry some weight. And they did. But apparently putting my Acme experience down on an application was like throwing an anchor to a drowning man. When I was fresh out of college, with very little practical experience, the places where I submitted a job application would send me a form letter saying basically 'more experienced people also applied, but try again at a future date'. But now that I had 5 years with Acme, plus 18 months writing programs at a small company before Acme hired me, my applications were for the most part totally ignored. I was lucky to get a 'no thank you' form letter in response to my application. The lack of response from the county in which I reside was the most disheartening. I had applied, interviewed, and been offered a position with the county in 1979. Ironically, this offer came a few hours after my having already accepted Acme's offer of a position. Another ad was for an 'entry level' programmer with a company that was using the same type of computer and operating system as Acme. I applied for the job just 'knowing' this was to be the start of my climb back into the mainstream of life. The company placed the same ad in the newspaper a few days after I had applied, even though they hadn't contacted me. I went back to their office and inquired why they didn't even grant me the courtesy of an interview. The young girl taking applications, after making a phone call, told me "There is no record of you even having applied". I filled out another application but they still failed to contact me. I had been answering every ad for a programmer. But now it seemed futile. If my almost seven years of experience didn't qualify me for an 'entry level' position, or at least an interview, I sure couldn't expect to get a job requiring an experienced programmer. Although I would have loved to get a job at a restaurant or similar operation, my lack of stamina coupled with my other physical problems almost precluded any chance for success in such an endeavor. I was forced to take a variety of odd jobs, the most ironic of which was performing menial day labor for Acme. I also spent a great deal of time picking up aluminum cans. As time passed, I began to wonder why I had spent my youth working and going to school while my peers were partying and living the good life. And when the Equal Rights Commission informed me that there was no basis for my charge of discrimination, I was flabbergasted! It seems that if you are a member of a recognized minority and lose your job, a homosexual wanting to adopt a child, or have a bumper sticker saying 'shit happens' civil rights laws can be applicable. Or at least there are organizations willing to promote your 'rights'. But I could understand how powerless the EEOC was if the charge had to be based on my speech impairment. The charge had nothing to do with my speech impairment, it hinged on my rights as a human being. Perhaps if I had stuttered "gogood momorning ssir!", I could have claimed the VP was offended by my speech and civil rights laws could have applied. But by asserting my dignity and not feeding someone's ego, I must have broken some unwritten law. Human dignity, except possibly to members of a recognized minority or in totally abstract cases, doesn't seem to carry much weight in our society. It seemed, at least to me, that they could have extrapolated some civil rights issue to fit my case. Apparently however, laws assuring equal rights were written in a manner meant to exclude white males. I even read about a case in which the I.R.S. fired a clerk-typist for what was termed 'incompetence and job attitude'. When the black clerk-typist charged that she was fired because her skin was too 'light', the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission allowed her to sue the I.R.S. in an attempt to get her job back. If the government has to spend time and resources refereeing fights on the relative merits of different shades of black, it is easy to understand how white males can get lost in the process. The employer's counter-charge of employee 'incompetence' is to be expected. That is probably standard practice for all employers. And I don't have any idea whether or not the charge is valid in the clerk-typist's case. I know that it wasn't valid in my case. Perhaps the woman's former co-workers at the I.R.S. had more backbone then my former co-workers at Acme, and testified in her behalf. Or could it have been that being a member of a minority class, or at least two minority classes as in the case of the black, female, clerk-typist, meant there was a presumption of innocence in the charge of incompetence? Perhaps the investigating agency, wanting to validate the charge of discrimination, may have proceeded in a manner intended to take into account any attempts by the I.R.S. to influence testimony of witnesses. The agency is, after all, mainly interested in minority rights. At least that is what I was led to believe. Devoting more energy to charges involving minority class members probably makes sense since such cases make it easier to justify the agency's existence. And adds to EEOC employees job security. Even more important, the EEOC only attempts to ensure the application of laws that are on the books. At least in regards to the non-minorities. In my case, was there a presumption that I was incompetent? A desire to believe the charge of the company? I understand that my fellow programmers at Acme had written letters to the EEOC testifying to my incompetence. Apparently Acme had kept an incompetent employee around for 5 years. And my fellow programmers were so moved by my incompetence that they took it on themselves to write the letters. It couldn't have been that they knew it was in their best personal interest to write the letters. Perhaps they are, but nothing is ever widely reported about attempts to ascertain whether or not a fired minority employee was competent for the job. If a member of a minority class loses a job, and alleges that it was because of prejudice, there MUST have been an injustice committed. At least it seems that way since a company beating a charge of discrimination by proving employee incompetence should make nationwide newspaper headlines. When a charge of discrimination is validated, that never has any problem making headlines across the country. Either the defendants in a charge of discrimination are never vindicated, or perhaps that is such an unpopular decision that it isn't publicized. In the real world, sometimes you can lose your job because the boss doesn't like you. Not because of your skin color, body plumbing, or something else that can be considered the basis for a charge of discrimination. It is possible that the boss just doesn't like you because of a personality conflict. At least those of us that aren't fortunate enough to be covered by the government's protective umbrella can apparently lose jobs because of this. I would have readily accepted Acme's action as something that just happens if the same thing could 'just happen' to anyone, regardless of their minority status. Their should be a college class called 'Real Life 101'. Or since not everyone attends college, perhaps the class should be mandatory for graduation from high school. But since the high school dropout rate is horrendously high, maybe it would be better to have such a class in elementary school. Get their minds while they are young and impressionable. Let people grow up understanding that while it is usually possible to succeed playing by the rules, sometimes there are advantages to wandering through life wearing a 'perpetual pucker'. It would have made a dramatic difference in my perception of the 'rules of the game'. And an even more dramatic difference in my actions. I may have been unable to turn my head while walking and not verbally responded to the VP's acknowledgement of my greeting. But apologizing and begging for forgiveness was out of the question. If the truth be known, I was the one that had been wronged by the tone of his voice when he asked "Do you know who I am?!". As if it really mattered who he was! If I had a better understanding of the way things worked, I could have taken steps to avoid the possibility of such a situation ever arising. I would never have left the conference room during the break. Forcing my pitiful presence on the people it was possible to encounter was patently unfair to them. It was probably a mistake to even attend the meeting. Or perhaps it would have been better not to have a job which, on occasion, placed me in close proximity to people from a different social strata then that which I was accustomed to be around. If nothing else, my motorcycle accident opened my eyes to the injustices minorities had endured for years. Having never attended a racially segregated school, at least after reaching an age where I would have noticed and understood it, the occurrence of same seemed almost a totally abstract idea. If it hadn't been for my parents stories, television news shows, or books and magazines; I would never have imagined such things had ever existed. My first place of employment, the bagel bakery, was owned by an immigrant from Mexico who was married to a Jewish woman. For the most part the other workers were either legal or illegal guys of Hispanic descent. The bakery also employed Blacks, Jews, and women. And part of the time while I was working for the Pizza restaurant, the area manager and one of my store managers were women. Many co-workers were either Blacks or Women. I was never exposed to or guilty of discrimination. And yet it seemed like I was being asked to foot the bill for acts committed by some members of my class. It is almost as if being a white male condemns you to 'pay for the sins of your fathers'. Why else wouldn't the Equal Rights Commission have come galloping to my aid? My co-workers may have been dissuaded from speaking the truth, but it seems probable that similar occurrences take place in other charges of discrimination. And yet when an outrageous incident such as a noticeable lack of minority employees is discovered, or a charge is made by a minority class member; somehow the truth is discovered. Or at least there seems to be more interest expressed by the agency. Since the VP wasn't man enough to discuss the event with me, I couldn't even really be sure if his hysteria was due to my inability to turn my head and respond to his acknowledgement of my head nod? Or if it was because he didn't like the audacity displayed by an employee who wouldn't feed his ego? I, due to my background and naivety, didn't comprehend the significance of my actions. And the importance, to Acme's management, of putting an end to any attempt at forcing them to justify the VP's actions. They would teach me. Oh boy, would they teach me! gregated school, at least after reaching an age where I would have noticed and understood it, the occurrence of same seemedI& t 0> #&(*l.04"7;F?BF,ILbPSU`X\_bsx8zVz}p<8l(r@\4̪Z "@&.  2'(   2'( X-Xtj (2"'( X-X 0Z   2'( $