Any Good Advice Out There?????? Any Representation Out There????? I've been asking about diversity representation in another state.
I made a complaint to the EEOC, Jan. 2004, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Apr 2004, both of which were dismissed without any investigation, each agency sat back and waited for the submission of the company's response. Incidentally, I was contacted by the director of the EEOC, asking me if I wanted to proceed, after I was shown a copy of the company's response, which I don't believe is proper. I now see in the EEOC's and the HCRC's own publications, matters such as mine that were investigated and even adjudicated. During the HCRC's lack of investigation, I only heard from them at the intake and when I received their letter of dismissal.
I furnished the EEOC and the HCRC with names of co-workers who said they would speak for me. They were not interviewed. I was informed by an investigator at the EEOC that no one visited the site. There was a similar situation here with UPS, where an employee was fired for doing less egregious acts than his co-workers, which I believe is the case here. I saw co-workers break company equipment, cuss freely, ask for sexual favors, and bring children and friends to the work site. Throughout this experience I have been told by these agencies' staff and lawyers, literally or in effect, "there is no smoking gun here". This is only due to there being no investigation. In the least, there is a pattern that should compel any thinking person to ask questions.
Subsequent to this, my work was sabotaged on more than one occasion, and reports to management only resulted in them twisting the situation in attempts to placate me and set me up for these spurious accusations by my co-workers. Each complaint of mine was a matter of my erroneous "interpretation", as stated by management, while my co-workers complaints were valid descriptions of my "misconduct". As a result of the accusations, I was suspended, without pay, pending an investigation for, I kid you not, a co-worker accusing me of harassing her by clapping my hands and signing "Pink Cadillac", and another saying, I was teasing her when I asked her to say my name and that of the manager, to see if I could distinguish the two.
I was terminated in May 2004, two weeks after the dismissal of the EEOC complaint that was not investigated, and a day after informing management that I overheard a co-worker saying to the one that accused me of harassing her by singing, "we're going to show him the power of p----. I was denied unemployment insurance, June 2004, with a fact-finding interview done over the telephone that was not reviewed or signed by me, as it should have been before it was made part of the official record and used at my future appeal. The subsequent appeal Aug. 2004 was biased, prejudiced, and contained perjured statements by the witnesses for my former employer. I am now told that the recording of the hearing does not exist because it was transcribed.
I have contacted the ACLU, and given them much information, but they seem more interested in writing briefs for exotic entertainers, arrested for doing lap dances. First they tell me they cannot help unless the matter involves a federal agency, then they tell me they can if a decision is against me, then they tell me they do not have the manpower and time. Each of the criteria I met at the time I contacted them.
Coincidently, I find a lawyer, Roger Fonseca, at the firm representing my former employer, is the national representative for the Hawaii chapter of the ACLU and their staff, also have a few names that are the same as those associated with Hawaii real estate. They cannot help, but they can accept my information.
I have written to the DOJ, only to have my information shuffled from one agency to another, including the Department of the Interior, and finally coming full circle to the Hawaii Department of Labor. I do not think this was coincidence. At the HCRC, there is a commission member with the same name as the owners of my former employer's business, one Coral Wong Pietsch.
Mrs. Pietsch is a general in the U.S. Army Reserve, and an attorney, a very powerful position with ties to D.C., I'm sure. It has long been my suspicion that this may have played a roll in the lack of effort on the part of officials that has attended this matter. Each party's history I research has some relation to another, be it professional, academic, and even familial.
I now look at web sites for all the organizations I sought help at - e-mail to the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, all representative's and senator's offices, Legal Aid Society, Hawaii Dept. of Labor and the DOL - national, EEOC - Hawaii, district, and national offices, NAACP Hawaii, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, ACLU of Hawaii, Hawaii - Department of Health, HIOSH and OSHA ( regional and national ), Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, the Hawaii Office of Information Practices, the Ombudsman's Office where my letter explaining the situation and their reply stating they could do nothing, are the only correspondence I had during it's investigation, and the Hawaii State Bar Association, where the lawyers who are members of the Real Property and Financial Services Section, are also affiliated with these other organizations, or directly associated with my former employer, or the firm that represents them - Torkildson, Katz. Fonseca, Hetherington, and Moore.
The Real Property and Financial Services Section includes a lawyer I was assisted by, one Andre Wooten, who at the time told me nothing of his involvement with this organization. He was suggested to me by church members and NAACP officer Alfonso Braggs. I pull up the staff or the particular board of directors of these organizations and there are last names that are the same and have some relationship, mostly with real estate, and more than a few with ties to California.
Two names in particular are quite suspicious. A Kouchi, at Volunteer Legal Services, which was the last name of the HR assistant at Title Guaranty, Pang which is the name of a front desk worker at the YMCA, who I complained about signing for my mail. and that of a Appeals Officer at Department of Labor - Security Appeals Referees Office.
There are too many relationships here to be mere coincidence, and are questionable, at least. My information was passed by one Elain Chao - Department Of Labor, in D.C. to Tin Shing Chao Department of Labor here in Hawaii, who used an erroneous date to nullify my complaint. This was after a layover in California with Ms. Alison Pauley at the regional offices. Whose CASPA investigation stated that I should have made this a written complaint, when Hawaii law states it does not matter, whether written or verbal. Could she be related to the Pauley's who have donated to the University of Hawaii, and have owned land here?
The complex in Hawaii that houses the Department of Labor is also where the HIOSH offices and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission offices are located. This name, Pang, pops up in various places dealing with state government and real estate. I now know these agencies to be straw dogs that do everything but contend with the status quo.
For the most part, the agencies that pretend to help, most notably the NAACP and ACLU, only collect information and then say they can do nothing; I wonder what happens to the information. Incidentally my former employer's representation is one of the largest contributors to Legal Aid Society. Concerning Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, I have recently discovered that one of two lawyers they referred is an attorney at the law firm representing my former employer, and the other is a realtor in Honolulu, and also licensed to practice in California.
I mention the YMCA because in 2002, I had complained about what I believed to be prostitution, facilitated by staff there. And when I informed the supervisor at Title Guaranty, her response was to leave well enough alone, after I informed her that I had, in my opinion angered some people there. My subsequent report to the police department was investigated by the police calling the YMCA and asking them if my suspicions were true. I think you can see what position this left me in. In my lay opinion, this was a sloppy and dangerous way to initiate and conclude an investigation.
I mostly use the public library to use the Internet, i.e. write letters and do research. Needless to say, this is not the most secure environment to do this type of activity. And I have had problems at this library with the computers and the staff. At the library, I have seen the text change when I am typing, without commands initiated by me. The printer is connected to the computer at the librarians' desk. On one occasion, I was told by a security guard that a librarian had complained about me harassing her because I asked for her name to report her behavior.
After contacting the librarian's office, there is no record or remembrance of this aspect of the report. This tactic of "bait and switch" has been used on more than one occasion, by different entities. After not being online for 3 days I saw where someone had requested an Army Knowledge Online account in my name, or I should say my screen name. I saw an attorney - John L. Knorek - from the firm representing my former employer enter the philosophy department and ask for a librarian, Kathy, by name.
Yee is the name of the head librarian at the State Library and the name of a former employee of the United States Attorney's Office and HCRC, did training for the Department of Justice, and worked for the Massachusetts Attorney General.
I made a complaint to the EEOC, Jan. 2004, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Apr 2004, both of which were dismissed without any investigation, each agency sat back and waited for the submission of the company's response. Incidentally, I was contacted by the director of the EEOC, asking me if I wanted to proceed, after I was shown a copy of the company's response, which I don't believe is proper. I now see in the EEOC's and the HCRC's own publications, matters such as mine that were investigated and even adjudicated. During the HCRC's lack of investigation, I only heard from them at the intake and when I received their letter of dismissal.
I furnished the EEOC and the HCRC with names of co-workers who said they would speak for me. They were not interviewed. I was informed by an investigator at the EEOC that no one visited the site. There was a similar situation here with UPS, where an employee was fired for doing less egregious acts than his co-workers, which I believe is the case here. I saw co-workers break company equipment, cuss freely, ask for sexual favors, and bring children and friends to the work site. Throughout this experience I have been told by these agencies' staff and lawyers, literally or in effect, "there is no smoking gun here". This is only due to there being no investigation. In the least, there is a pattern that should compel any thinking person to ask questions.
Subsequent to this, my work was sabotaged on more than one occasion, and reports to management only resulted in them twisting the situation in attempts to placate me and set me up for these spurious accusations by my co-workers. Each complaint of mine was a matter of my erroneous "interpretation", as stated by management, while my co-workers complaints were valid descriptions of my "misconduct". As a result of the accusations, I was suspended, without pay, pending an investigation for, I kid you not, a co-worker accusing me of harassing her by clapping my hands and signing "Pink Cadillac", and another saying, I was teasing her when I asked her to say my name and that of the manager, to see if I could distinguish the two.
I was terminated in May 2004, two weeks after the dismissal of the EEOC complaint that was not investigated, and a day after informing management that I overheard a co-worker saying to the one that accused me of harassing her by singing, "we're going to show him the power of p----. I was denied unemployment insurance, June 2004, with a fact-finding interview done over the telephone that was not reviewed or signed by me, as it should have been before it was made part of the official record and used at my future appeal. The subsequent appeal Aug. 2004 was biased, prejudiced, and contained perjured statements by the witnesses for my former employer. I am now told that the recording of the hearing does not exist because it was transcribed.
I have contacted the ACLU, and given them much information, but they seem more interested in writing briefs for exotic entertainers, arrested for doing lap dances. First they tell me they cannot help unless the matter involves a federal agency, then they tell me they can if a decision is against me, then they tell me they do not have the manpower and time. Each of the criteria I met at the time I contacted them.
Coincidently, I find a lawyer, Roger Fonseca, at the firm representing my former employer, is the national representative for the Hawaii chapter of the ACLU and their staff, also have a few names that are the same as those associated with Hawaii real estate. They cannot help, but they can accept my information.
I have written to the DOJ, only to have my information shuffled from one agency to another, including the Department of the Interior, and finally coming full circle to the Hawaii Department of Labor. I do not think this was coincidence. At the HCRC, there is a commission member with the same name as the owners of my former employer's business, one Coral Wong Pietsch.
Mrs. Pietsch is a general in the U.S. Army Reserve, and an attorney, a very powerful position with ties to D.C., I'm sure. It has long been my suspicion that this may have played a roll in the lack of effort on the part of officials that has attended this matter. Each party's history I research has some relation to another, be it professional, academic, and even familial.
I now look at web sites for all the organizations I sought help at - e-mail to the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, all representative's and senator's offices, Legal Aid Society, Hawaii Dept. of Labor and the DOL - national, EEOC - Hawaii, district, and national offices, NAACP Hawaii, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, ACLU of Hawaii, Hawaii - Department of Health, HIOSH and OSHA ( regional and national ), Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, the Hawaii Office of Information Practices, the Ombudsman's Office where my letter explaining the situation and their reply stating they could do nothing, are the only correspondence I had during it's investigation, and the Hawaii State Bar Association, where the lawyers who are members of the Real Property and Financial Services Section, are also affiliated with these other organizations, or directly associated with my former employer, or the firm that represents them - Torkildson, Katz. Fonseca, Hetherington, and Moore.
The Real Property and Financial Services Section includes a lawyer I was assisted by, one Andre Wooten, who at the time told me nothing of his involvement with this organization. He was suggested to me by church members and NAACP officer Alfonso Braggs. I pull up the staff or the particular board of directors of these organizations and there are last names that are the same and have some relationship, mostly with real estate, and more than a few with ties to California.
Two names in particular are quite suspicious. A Kouchi, at Volunteer Legal Services, which was the last name of the HR assistant at Title Guaranty, Pang which is the name of a front desk worker at the YMCA, who I complained about signing for my mail. and that of a Appeals Officer at Department of Labor - Security Appeals Referees Office.
There are too many relationships here to be mere coincidence, and are questionable, at least. My information was passed by one Elain Chao - Department Of Labor, in D.C. to Tin Shing Chao Department of Labor here in Hawaii, who used an erroneous date to nullify my complaint. This was after a layover in California with Ms. Alison Pauley at the regional offices. Whose CASPA investigation stated that I should have made this a written complaint, when Hawaii law states it does not matter, whether written or verbal. Could she be related to the Pauley's who have donated to the University of Hawaii, and have owned land here?
The complex in Hawaii that houses the Department of Labor is also where the HIOSH offices and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission offices are located. This name, Pang, pops up in various places dealing with state government and real estate. I now know these agencies to be straw dogs that do everything but contend with the status quo.
For the most part, the agencies that pretend to help, most notably the NAACP and ACLU, only collect information and then say they can do nothing; I wonder what happens to the information. Incidentally my former employer's representation is one of the largest contributors to Legal Aid Society. Concerning Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, I have recently discovered that one of two lawyers they referred is an attorney at the law firm representing my former employer, and the other is a realtor in Honolulu, and also licensed to practice in California.
I mention the YMCA because in 2002, I had complained about what I believed to be prostitution, facilitated by staff there. And when I informed the supervisor at Title Guaranty, her response was to leave well enough alone, after I informed her that I had, in my opinion angered some people there. My subsequent report to the police department was investigated by the police calling the YMCA and asking them if my suspicions were true. I think you can see what position this left me in. In my lay opinion, this was a sloppy and dangerous way to initiate and conclude an investigation.
I mostly use the public library to use the Internet, i.e. write letters and do research. Needless to say, this is not the most secure environment to do this type of activity. And I have had problems at this library with the computers and the staff. At the library, I have seen the text change when I am typing, without commands initiated by me. The printer is connected to the computer at the librarians' desk. On one occasion, I was told by a security guard that a librarian had complained about me harassing her because I asked for her name to report her behavior.
After contacting the librarian's office, there is no record or remembrance of this aspect of the report. This tactic of "bait and switch" has been used on more than one occasion, by different entities. After not being online for 3 days I saw where someone had requested an Army Knowledge Online account in my name, or I should say my screen name. I saw an attorney - John L. Knorek - from the firm representing my former employer enter the philosophy department and ask for a librarian, Kathy, by name.
Yee is the name of the head librarian at the State Library and the name of a former employee of the United States Attorney's Office and HCRC, did training for the Department of Justice, and worked for the Massachusetts Attorney General.
Last edited:
