MARGULIES, DAY ADMIT 'PREFERRING OF CHARGES' AGAINST ME WAS A SCAM

Saturday, October 1, 2011

'RANTINGS' BLOGGER ADMITS 'PREFERRING OF CHARGES' WAS A SCAM!

Rantings' Blogger admits 'Preferring of Charges' was a SCAM:

Rantings: "It was thrown out but it was a victory and I've said this before in a post before the meeting that just because you loose doesn't mean you loose because you've established a precedent and that's important stuff.  It's more important to have the transparency than to have Ellen sanctioned. I'd rather have the victory than have her sanctioned."

From ATU International Constitution:

"21.7 Disclosure of Union Business.  No officer or member of the L.U. shall furnish to any unauthorized person a list of the names and addresses of the membership. All business of the L.U. must be kept strictly private from persons outside of the Union, unless publication be authorized by the L.U., and persons giving out any information contrary to the L.U. shall after proceeding in accordance with the provisions of Section 22, if found guilty, be fined, suspended or expelled."

The word 'ADDRESS', as written in the ATU Constitution or any other legal document is not ambiguous.  One cannot simply change the meaning of the word to suit their purposes. The word "address" as stated in the Constitution is referring to a home ADDRESS or someones personal residence.

If I had to be libeled - as in - humiliated and embarrassed by and through Chris Day, Al M and John Olsen to over 3400 Union members, in my workplace and hundreds of others within Trimet's system and the Community - not ONCE BUT TWICE, PUBLICLY because I posted names and badge numbers on MY site from co-workers who couldn't take a moment to read, understand or ask what they were signing THEN WHY DIDN'T STEVE FUNG AND AL MARGULIES have "Preferring of Charges" filed against them for doing the EXACT SAME THING?!!! 

Rantings stated in another video, "I DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW UNION RULES."

Both 'Preferring of Charges' complaints filed against me were SCAMS.  The first one  misrepresented their signature gathering to co-workers and Union members plus signatures were forged and according to Al M, he was too drunk to know what he was signing.   They counted on the the second 'Preferring of Charges' failing so they could publicly post secret Union documents. i.e.: see previous postings

Margulies, "It was thrown out but it was a victory and I've said this before in a post before the meeting that just because you loose doesn't mean you loose because you've established a precedent and that's important stuff.  It's more important to have the transparency than to have Ellen sanctioned. I'd rather have the victory than have her sanctioned."

I immediately contacted Jon Hunt.  He advised me to contact Susan Stoner, ATU in-house attorney.  She advised me, "I am way too busy to read your e-mails. Also I am not the appropriate person. Please send to Jon Hunt." even though I made it clear the EVIDENCE was attached to prove the scam.  I re-contacted Jon who then advised me that he and Ron would look over the information and get back with me.  That was August 26th. One month ago.  I have NOT been contacted since.

If silence is a statement, what's their statement?!!

After taking into account comments I received earlier regarding this post as well as personal experience with Jon Hunt during the filing of the two 'Preferring of Charges', I have come to believe that this Union has little if any interest in it's members.  Jon Hunt's decision to allow Chris Day and Al Margulies even one tenth of a second of ATU meeting time to bring these issues forward is discreditable to the membership and Union as a whole.

"Wow,
I think its hard to like anything on this subject. Makes a sick sort of perverse sense.
Thanks for bringing it to light. I hope for yourself and all of the rest of us, that you get a real resolution, and or conviction. My heart goes out to you for being the lightning rod of this cyber thug."
Bryan Lovelass

MAN-BOYS

"MAN BOYS".  Pre-pubescent girl hating little boys walking around in the bodies of men.  

It literally sickens me that I've been forced to defend myself from a group matching this description because there's no way to make sense of them, there's no way to communicate with those who resort to name calling.  It's infantile and yet their numbers are growing. There's no intellectual balance.  No professionalism or respect. So why bother?

...because of the power of the internet.  Because how quickly the man-boy virus spreads.  Without voices to speak out, without laws to protect us...

...Cyber Stalking has become one of the most serious and personally devastating attacks one can experience in their lifetime.

And in the end - joan crawford

Sunday, September 25, 2011

AND IN THE END...

"DON'T FUCK WITH ME FELLAS, THIS AIN'T MY FIRST TIME AT THE RODEO"

Joan Crawford

In light of Jeff Ackerson's response,  THIS is the LAST STRAW!!! As agreed, I sent him a preview of the blog postings involving him for his feedback. I kept my word.  It was understood that if he had questions or problems with it we could agree to discuss it as adults.  He started 'name calling'  and avoided the subject.  I then received another e-mail in which he states, "please stop harassing me. no more emails. go away.your out of control."

So THIS posting is for him, his lack of integrity and his buddies:

I am NOT a victim!  

VICTIM'S DON'T FIGHT BACK. I'VE ALWAYS FOUGHT BACK. My intention has always been to see this 'THING' all the way through to the end! The END meaning a final resolution through the CRIMINAL COURT system AND the FEDERAL COURT system,  for however long that takes.   

And, in the END, I will see to it that NOT ANOTHER WOMAN suffers from the public scrutiny, abuse and humiliation I have had to endure through my workplace, my Union and my Community via the internet by man boys who exist without a sense of dignity or respect for themselves and others and with waaay too much time on their hands. 

In the END, It'll be me living in the mansion up on the hill while you small minded piglets swill off your 20 ouncer's or fortified wine while waiting in a line somewhere for week old worm infested food. 

If ya don't have the brains or even the common decency to address someone who is sincerely trying to make things better then keep your trap shut!

If the only way you know of debating or resolving conflict is through NAME CALLING then you and your 'Rantings' brotherhood of ignorant red necks deserve each other.

Chris Day refers to me as a "piece of shit" and that people "are in fear of me"

Jeff Welch refers to me as a "bitch, pathetic, lesbian, psychotic and 'him'"

Al Margulies/aka 'Rantings of a Trimet Bus Driver' refers to me as, "Obsessive/compulsive, whack job, paranoid schizophrenic, who makes life miserable for numerous people at Trimet."

John Olsen says I "threatened to castrate" him as well as submitted several other reports about me to HR regarding his sexual Orientation which were investigated and found unsubstantiated. A separate posting is in the works for him (and Day) and their 13+ HR write-ups.

Dan Booker tells co-workers that I "Don't like Gay men." 

Punkrawker 4783 says my blog is "crap and I crave attention"

Jeff Ackerson says I'm "obsessed" and makes fun of me by calling me, "Angry Ellen". He accuses me of "SPREADING ANGER AND DISCONTENT" and "harassing him plus being out of control" regarding an agreement we both reached at the August 14th ATU meeting.  

This is just the tip of the iceberg. 

The list of names and name calling is enormous.

These man boys, without ever having had an actual conversation or life experience with me, (except Al) seem to believe it's OK to assault my character, publicly.  Do they beat and kick their wives, children and dogs when no ones looking?  

Each one tries to 'out do' the other.  They are a formed 'hate group' of unproductive  abusive man boys feeding off the ignorance and hatred of each other. Not one of them has an interest in living a positive, productive and nurturing life.  I had a friendship with Al several years ago but ended it just after his blog 'took off'.  I do not know any of these other men.  Their perceptions of me are based strictly on rumor and innuendo. 

YOU HAVE BELITTLED, LIED AND BROUGHT MUCH DISCONTENT TO MY LIFE AND WORKPLACE.  BECAUSE OF YOU OUR CO-WORKERS DON'T KNOW WHO IS SAFE TO TALK WITH ANYMORE. YOU HAVE MADE A PUBLIC MOCKERY OF EVERYTHING THAT SHOULD BE SACRED AND RIGHT IN THE WORLD AND PARTICIPATE IN THINGS THAT ARE EVIL AND DESTRUCTIVE TO OTHERS.

Yes Jeff,  I WAS angry - many times. "Angry Ellen" So what?!  Sometimes I'm angry and sometimes I'm hurt and sad and depending on which day of the week it is,  I can be happy and all smiley and yet other times intense and serious. But right now at THIS VERY MOMENT - I'm TOTALLY ENRAGED!  That's who I am Jeff.  I come with emotions.  They're mine and I celebrate and embrace them.  All of 'em.  Imagine, a real live breathing feeling human being who isn't afraid to be who she is where she is. That's my integrity!  I hear a different drum. I don't succumb to anyone neither do I look towards others for acceptance or approval unless it's from those I respect.  So if you don't like "Angry Ellen" you can just - fucking - lump  -  it!

WHAT YOU HAVE NEVER BOTHERED TO FIND OUT ABOUT ME IS THAT I AM A KIND GENTLE AND LOVING SPIRIT. AN HONEST DECENT HARD WORKING HUMAN BEING. I AM A COMPASSIONATE GIVING AND NURTURING INFLUENCE TO MANY WHO HAVE FAR LESS THEN I.  I AM POSITIVE PRODUCTIVE AND PASSIONATE ABOUT THOSE THINGS WHICH INTEREST ME. I AM JUST AS MUCH A PART OF THIS UNIVERSE AS YOU AND DESERVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF COURTESY AND RESPECT.

Rantings' blogger Margulies reported to HR that I had made slanderous and disparaging remarks about him in one (or several) of the articles I wrote.  The HR interviewer slid about an inch of paperwork over to me. This blog posting was on top.  During the investigative interview she made no mention of disparaging or slanderous remarks. She didn't tell us what post she was referring to.  She spent the majority of time instead discussing a screen shot I posted of Rantings, insisting it was a recording I made of him from his home.  She refused to answer questions.  

... AND IN THE END

Originally published 9/25/2011

"DON'T FUCK WITH ME FELLAS, THIS AIN'T MY FIRST TIME AT THE RODEO"

Joan Crawford

In light of Jeff Ackerson's response,  THIS is the LAST STRAW!!! As agreed, I sent him a preview of the blog postings involving him for his feedback. I kept my word.  It was understood that if he had questions or problems with it we could agree to discuss it as adults.  He started 'name calling'  and avoided the subject.  I then received another e-mail in which he states, "please stop harassing me. no more emails. go away.your out of control."

So THIS posting is for him, his lack of integrity and his buddies:

I am NOT a victim!  

VICTIM'S DON'T FIGHT BACK. I'VE ALWAYS FOUGHT BACK. My intention has always been to see this 'THING' all the way through to the end! The END meaning a final resolution through the CRIMINAL COURT system AND the FEDERAL COURT system,  for however long that takes.   

And, in the END, I will see to it that NOT ANOTHER WOMAN suffers from the public scrutiny, abuse and humiliation I have had to endure through my workplace, my Union and my Community via the internet by man boys who exist without a sense of dignity or respect for themselves and others and with waaay too much time on their hands. 

In the END, It'll be me living in the mansion up on the hill while you small minded piglets swill off your 20 ouncer's or fortified wine while waiting in a line somewhere for week old worm infested food. 

If ya don't have the brains or even the common decency to address someone who is sincerely trying to make things better then keep your trap shut!

If the only way you know of debating or resolving conflict is through NAME CALLING then you and your 'Rantings' brotherhood of ignorant red necks deserve each other.

Chris Day refers to me as a "piece of shit" and that people "are in fear of me"

Jeff Welch refers to me as a "bitch, pathetic, lesbian, psychotic and 'him'"

Al Margulies/aka 'Rantings of a Trimet Bus Driver' refers to me as, "Obsessive/compulsive, whack job, paranoid schizophrenic, who makes life miserable for numerous people at Trimet."

John Olsen says I "threatened to castrate" him as well as submitted several other reports about me to HR regarding his sexual Orientation which were investigated and found unsubstantiated. A separate posting is in the works for him (and Day) and their 13+ HR write-ups.

Dan Booker tells co-workers that I "Don't like Gay men." 

Punkrawker 4783 says my blog is "crap and I crave attention"

Jeff Ackerson says I'm "obsessed" and makes fun of me by calling me, "Angry Ellen". He accuses me of "SPREADING ANGER AND DISCONTENT" and "harassing him plus being out of control" regarding an agreement we both reached at the August 14th ATU meeting.  

This is just the tip of the iceberg. 

The list of names and name calling is enormous.

These man boys, without ever having had an actual conversation or life experience with me, (except Al) seem to believe it's OK to assault my character, publicly.  Do they beat and kick their wives, children and dogs when no ones looking?  

Each one tries to 'out do' the other.  They are a formed 'hate group' of unproductive  abusive man boys feeding off the ignorance and hatred of each other. Not one of them has an interest in living a positive, productive and nurturing life.  I had a friendship with Al several years ago but ended it just after his blog 'took off'.  I do not know any of these other men.  Their perceptions of me are based strictly on rumor and innuendo. 

YOU HAVE BELITTLED, LIED AND BROUGHT MUCH DISCONTENT TO MY LIFE AND WORKPLACE.  BECAUSE OF YOU OUR CO-WORKERS DON'T KNOW WHO IS SAFE TO TALK WITH ANYMORE. YOU HAVE MADE A PUBLIC MOCKERY OF EVERYTHING THAT SHOULD BE SACRED AND RIGHT IN THE WORLD AND PARTICIPATE IN THINGS THAT ARE EVIL AND DESTRUCTIVE TO OTHERS.

Yes Jeff,  I WAS angry - many times. "Angry Ellen" So what?!  Sometimes I'm angry and sometimes I'm hurt and sad and depending on which day of the week it is,  I can be happy and all smiley and yet other times intense and serious. But right now at THIS VERY MOMENT - I'm TOTALLY ENRAGED!  That's who I am Jeff.  I come with emotions.  They're mine and I celebrate and embrace them.  All of 'em.  Imagine, a real live breathing feeling human being who isn't afraid to be who she is where she is. That's my integrity!  I hear a different drum. I don't succumb to anyone neither do I look towards others for acceptance or approval unless it's from those I respect.  So if you don't like "Angry Ellen" you can just - fucking - lump  -  it!

WHAT YOU HAVE NEVER BOTHERED TO FIND OUT ABOUT ME IS THAT I AM A KIND GENTLE AND LOVING SPIRIT. AN HONEST DECENT HARD WORKING HUMAN BEING. I AM A COMPASSIONATE GIVING AND NURTURING INFLUENCE TO MANY WHO HAVE FAR LESS THEN I.  I AM POSITIVE PRODUCTIVE AND PASSIONATE ABOUT THOSE THINGS WHICH INTEREST ME. I AM JUST AS MUCH A PART OF THIS UNIVERSE AS YOU AND DESERVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF COURTESY AND RESPECT.

Rantings' blogger Margulies reported to HR that I had made slanderous and disparaging remarks about him in one (or several) of the articles I wrote.  The HR interviewer slid about an inch of paperwork over to me. This blog posting was on top.  During the investigative interview she made no mention of disparaging or slanderous remarks. She didn't tell us what post she was referring to.  She spent the majority of time instead discussing a screen shot I posted of Rantings, insisting it was a recording I made of him from his home.  She refused to answer questions.  

CHRIS DAY - AUGUST PREFERRING OF CHARGES MEETING

Originally published 9/23/2011

Back to the August "Preferring of Charges Meeting"

There were more members than usual because the picnic meeting had preceded the business meeting. Several stayed. Jon Hunt announced the agenda and of course when he mentioned the "Preferring of Charges" portion against me heads flung around the room looking for the culprit.  Chris Day showed up late.  What I noticed about him is that he looked more disheveled than usual. He looked like he hadn't slept in days or was VERY hungover.  He sat on the floor in the back of the room against a wall.  He had something in his hand = it wasn't a set of keys.  No pen or paper.  I looked back at him a few times.  He wasn't taking notes. He seemed to be semi-conscious - taking a nap or zoned out.  Days later I saw this posted on his blog.  

WHOA!!!  Had he actually TAPE RECORDED the meeting?!!!  This Chris Day guy is all busy accusing everyone else of being dishonest and illegal but ya know what they say, 'when you're pointing a finger at someone else, ya got three of 'em pointin' right back at cha.' 

When it came time for the "Preferring of Charges" part, Jon Hunt emphatically stated the Union is AGAINST it.  That it's ILLEGAL and, as was said in the first "Preferring of Charges" meeting, "she can sue us."  SO, WHY AM I HERE AND WHY IS MY NAME ALL MUDDIED UP?!!! Chris Day REFUSES comment.  (later on that).  I get THREE MINUTES WHICH GOT STRETCHED TO FIVE.  People are turned around in their seats watching me, trying to see if I LOOK EVIL.  Probably not hearing a word I'm saying - just sitting there judging me.  Expecting me to say something in five minutes that will make it all go away somehow.  Thinking to themselves that they didn't come here for this.  NO ONE actually BLACKBALLS anymore - do they?!!!  A couple of 'em asked questions. Lavern was the BEST part. She talked about how that action can IMPLODE a Union from the inside out.  But - is anyone listening?

I came loaded with notes and over $30 worth of copies to prove "it simply ain't true.  But I can't follow the notes 'cause there just isn't enough time and the copies never made it to the audience.  

Then comes Jeff Ackerson:  

"She did it to me too..."

What did I do that upset him so much that he felt he needed to reprimand me in a Union meeting?   After talking with him later, it appears he was upset that I wrote a posting on my blog where I showed the same video as above.  He felt I should have checked with him first. The topic had to do with people who support and encourage abusers. 

Ackerson is an avid fan and supporter of Margulies and his Rantings Blog which was proven through the series of e-mail posted below. And, as such he's heard the constant stream of the negative, abusive highly public and slanderous bashings I've received over the last couple of years. He's heard the same message over and over again.  If Ackerson didn't like or agree with my post he could have contacted me either through blog comments or through e-mail or phone, etc.  But instead, he (who is also an Executive Board Officer for ATU) chose to hold off on his OUTBURST until the Preferring of Charges meeting. So, what the fuck was that all about? He used his Union position to 'get back at me' and then voted "NO" I could've respected a 'YES' vote from him.  But now, I don't know who the hell  he is or what he stands for.  It was like - why bring it up in the first place to a room packed with people who don't understand and there isn't time to explain. It felt like he was purposely adding to the negativity so the boys would film him - and THEY DID!!!  

 Because of his outburst, he put himself in a position where he can't represent or vote or even 'sit' in meetings when my name comes up, which includes accident appeals or E-Board meetings.  He has to be in a position to represent the entire membership equally but he SINGLED ME OUT, I assume because of his relationship with Margulies.  (e-mails below more than suggest it)   The guys love their AL. He puts them on a You Tube and sings some bullshit praise and they get their 15 minutes.  Woo hoo!!!  

Soooo, I immediately try to rectify my part. He says he was upset because I hadn't contacted him BEFORE I put the posting up because he had specific reasons for coming to Al's defense. Civil Rights and Freedom of Speech.  But - you know - hate speech is not free speech.  And then you don't make excuses for him by saying he's "not a threat" and his blog is "information that's useful." because it's not. Just the fact alone that Margulies supports an admitted child molester is reason for concern. Nevertheless, I left under the impression that all was understood and it was over. NOT!!!

Weeks later, I'm writing a blog about the 'Preferring of Charges' meeting I had to again go through and the subsequent SCAM I discovered when Al and Chris started posting private Union business on their blogs and blaming me for it.  I contacted Jeff - as we agreed - to let him know I'd be writing about my experience in the last meeting and will be including his OUTBURST.  As previously agreed, I stated my intentions to let him read it before posting. This is what I got in return:

Click image to zoom.

Thread starts at bottom.

I am BLACK

Jeff is RED

CHRIS DAY - MORE PREFERRING OF CHARGES SCAMS

Originally published 9/23/2011

August 14, 2011 at 3PM

For the second time, I am summoned to attend an ATU meeting where I had to face Union Officials and members who were introduced to a new set of complaints filed against me by: 

Originally published 9/23/2011Click image to enlarge

The charges?  That I POSTED names and badge numbers of co-workers who signed petitions to have me black balled from my Union on this blog - a public blog.  And just in case that didn't work, they also charged me with giving names of the signatories to HR for punishment.  If you've been reading previous blog postings you know that wasn't true.

Why did I publish these?   Because the signatures were deceptively obtained (by Chris Day, John Olsen and Al Margulies) from co-workers during working hours who mostly didn't read or understand what they were signing.  Who were mostly told the petition signatures were "for The Union."  Because some of the signatures appeared 'forged' but Al M later noted that,  "I was so drunk I couldn't see what I was signing".

Because hundreds of e-mails were sent out to co-workers, management, bloggers from the community in and out of Oregon, because some e-mails were sent using the TM e-mail system, because an online survey had been taken asking the public to vote on my possible demise, because I, as a result have suffered much embarrassment and humiliation within my workplace and the community in which I live.

Because the signature gathering was a scam and because I was ENRAGED that my seemingly intelligent co-workers either trusted too much or didn't bother reading that what they signed could  affect the livelihood of another.  Because NOT ONE of them approached me with questions. Because Ed Brock signed the petition because he didn't like my speaking out when he BUZZED me with his Bus while I was cycling on NE 15th Avenue, nearly smashing me to death. What type of person would go through the Union process of blackballing a co-worker from union representation and benefits simply because he got caught harassing a cyclist?!!!  And I did it because NOT ONE OF THEM appeared to have enough sense to fight their way out of a bag.  

Why did I publish these?  Because I could - because there is absolutely NOTHING in the ATU Constitution which prevents me from publishing names and badge numbers.  

From ATU International Constitution:

"21.7 Disclosure of Union Business.  No officer or member of the L.U. shall furnish to any unauthorized person a list of the names and addresses of the membership. All business of the L.U. must be kept strictly private from persons outside of the Union, unless publication be authorized by the L.U., and persons giving out any information contrary to the L.U. shall after proceeding in accordance with the provisions of Section 22, if found guilty, be fined, suspended or expelled."

Soooo, If I had to face a public flogging of sorts because I posted names and badge numbers on my site - WHY DIDN'T STEVE FUNG AND AL MARGULIES have "Preferring of Charges" filed against them for doing the EXACT SAME thing?!!! 

Chris Day - Preferring of Charges - Scam #1

Originally published 9/23/11

Regarding 4th Preferring of Charges - August, 2011

I think it's important to understand the dynamics of these men in their quest to go as far as to want a fellow member blackballed.  Margulies would never have gone this far without the, support and encouragement of Day, Olsen and their VERY anti-Union fee objector (wanna be legal advisor) Jeff Welch. Whatever happened or didn't happen between Margulies, Day, Olsen, Booker and myself certainly didn't involve the Union to this degree. In fact, Margulies didn't even show up to vote for it the first time in April. And I was told he again didn't show up for the Monday meeting in August.  No reason for him to show up they already had a plan in place.  

Final vote count - Yes-1, No-84, and Abstained-6.

The point is that Day goes from one department to the next and from one manager to the next and when he runs out of managers and departments he goes to the Union and when that doesn't work he goes to International. His reputation at this point is one who works at exclusion.  I have heard from several sources that his plight in life appears to get people 'on his side' against others. When he didn't get anywhere on the other two Preferring of Charges he started reporting Hunt to International and even went so far as to "Preferring Charges" against him, until Hunt succumbed  from the pressure by serving me and posting the "Preferr of Charges"  requiring that it become part of the agenda and posting it in Union boxes and the ATU website.  And then, the worst part is that all these people are gathered round for Union business and what they get is all this NON-UNION PERSONAL BULLSHIT.  Day takes his crap to people who really do care about and make room and time in their lives to go to Union meetings.  It's all a scam and Jon Hunt lets him do it!  

ACCORDING TO THE ATU CONSTITUTION, IT'S ILLEGAL TO REVEAL THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES  OF MEMBERS just as it's illegal to reveal secret union business. 

BUT - ACCORDING TO DAY AND MARGULIES, POSTING MEMBERS NAMES AND BADGE NUMBERS ON A PUBLIC BLOG HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH the ATU CONSTITUTION.  They believe the posting of names and badge numbers on a public blog is the same as posting someones personal home address and that constitues enough evidence to have someone (like me) blackballed from the union UNLESS, of course it's Steve Fung or Margulies himself.  

Wording in legal documents or contracts such as the ATU Constitution are NOT ambiguous.  An address is an address - not a badge number.  MARGULIES AND DAY HAVE EVEN GONE SO FAR AS TO ACTUALLY START POSTING SECRET UNION DOCUMENTS ON THEIR PUBLIC SITES - wich is clearly a VIOLATION.  

For those of you who believe Margulies is pro-Union - check these out:  (Jeff Welch is an EXTREME ANTI-UNION HATER who gives freely of his anti-union bashing advice to Margulies and Day. )  I believe this is what one would call a "WOLF IN SHEEPS CLOTHING", if you know what I mean. Forgive me for tooting my own horn but I've been saying all along Margulies is responsible for posting sensitive Union information regarding our benefits on his blog that ended up being seen by the Conservative anti-union Common Cause and Cascade Policy Group (John Charles) and wonTrimet the Golden Fleece award.

I  PROVED THE FIRST 'PREFERRING OF CHARGES' WAS A SCAM BUT HUNT DID NOTHING ABOUT IT.  HE WOULDN'T EVEN RESPOND BACK.  THE SAME PROCESS USED TO NOTIFY MEMBERS OF THE PREFERRING OF CHARGES AGAINST ME THE FIRST TWO TIMES SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED TO NOTIFY THE MEMBERSHIP EXONERATING ME. 

THE SCAM AND NEW PREFERRING OF CHARGES SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN IT. EVERY MEETING, EVERY PROPERTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED. 

REGARDING THE FIRST PREFERRING OF CHARGES COMPLAINT:

SCAM #1

Had they gone about it professionally and in good faith I could have respected that process.  Who is there among us that has been accused of something that wouldn't welcome the opportunity to prove their innocence?  But, when my accusers (Day, Margulies and Olsen) went on their witch hunt and in order to get the required signatures they had to devise a mission that wasn't only deceptive in nature but included the participation of co-workers WITHOUT telling the co-workers what they were getting themselves in to.  Chris, John and Al deceived the Union, members from all properties, their signatories and co-workers.  The e-mails and online drama - it was all a scam - at MY expense.  

The vote was 108 NO to 3 YES.  (18 abstain)  They needed 60%.

I OBJECTED TO THE FACT that the charges he presented to potential signatories of his petition  were:

1.) 18 pages of single typed, single spaced unsubstantiated rhetoric.  He went so far as to include a paragraph which stated how many coworkers were 'in fear' of signing something against me." Like I was violent.  Now I hear from Jeff Ackerson that coworkers are in fear of me because I've been labeled 'obsessive'.  "Angry Ellen is obsessive"  Run for your lives....

2.)  presented to co-workers during work hours inside the bullpen area when I was present.

3.)  presented, according to some of the signatories in a rush, asking them to sign something       WITHOUT reading it, "for the Union".

4.)  In one case when informed by the signatory that he had "no time to read it", Mr. Day replied, "You know me, you know you can trust me."  And, a very embarrassed signatory later told me, "That is the last time I will ever sign something without reading it."

5.)  told me, "I didn't know I was signing something to have someone blackballed!"

6.) "I signed it because everyone else at the table did."

7.) "paperwork?  I didn't see any paperwork."

8.)  Signatures of the various petitions didn't match. One was missing making that petition void. One signature from the same person (Al Margulies) was completely different making that petition void.  Margulies even responded to the 'comments' section of my blog explaining he was 'so drunk he couldn't see what he was signing.', making that petition not just void but illegal.

9.)  He sent out, (I am told) hundreds of e-mail to managers, co-workers, media, the Black Caucus e-mail list, bloggers in Portland and Washington, etc including his 18 pages of unsubstantiated, unjustified Preferring of Charges against me.

A petition was even found on Chris Day's Blog asking members of the general public to involve themselves with our workplace and our Union.  There were 16 results.  One of the results, I am told came from the 14 YO child who is the alleged victim of Chris Parker.

Again, had they gone about it professionally and in good faith I could have respected that process.  Had it been done outside of my work environment - like in the parking area. Not one signatory approached me asking for my side. The negativity was viral.  I had followers of Al and Day's blogs on my bus, recognizing and approaching me on the streets, in stores I frequent.  It was all NEGATIVE. Not like anyone was asking for my autograph.

I filed Respectful Workplace and IT violations to HR ONLY against Al Margulies and Chris Day  Other than the two of 'em, I did NOT ask that anyone else be investigated for signing. One signatory was contacted but only because they wanted verification of the process used in order to obtain his signature.  In fact, we were all victims of the scam.  HR talked with Chris in person and Al over the phone.  My complaint wasn't even worthy enough for HR to require Al's presence.  Chris Day's actions were found in violation of Respectful Workplace and Internet Technology.  But he didn't get admonished for it until he had enough time to get me again and again - literally months later. Al got off scott free.

WHY DID THE BOYS DO THIS?  THIS IS WHERE THE SCAM STARTED:  

Clicking the image will make it larger.  

Through the first preferring of charges they discovered a few things:  

First, only the 3 of 'em (Day, Olsen and Booker) were interested in using their Union membership to vote YES. 

Second, not many members showed up to meetings.

Third, if they changed the wording around they could use it as a devise to make their effort appear as though they had actually won.

So, they changed the 108 against, 3 yes and 8 abstain vote around to mean:

If 60% of you all had voted FOR the Preferring of Charges - it would have meant (based on their logic)  that ANYONE could slander you and WITHOUT CONDUCTING AN INVESTIGATION you could actually have them thrown out of the Union. - which means you could force them to work without Union protection and benefits but they still have to pay dues.  

BUT, if only 3 of you voted FOR the Preferring of Charges and the measure clearly failed it meant that ANYONE could slander you and WITHOUT CONDUCTING AN INVESTIGATION you could still accuse them of still being guilty of slander.

Their motive - either way was designed to slander me.  I was still the one who had been publicly scrutinized by people who've never met or talked with me.  Yes or No vote - my head was still under the guillotine.