The counsel of the employer went on the record of the Federal record , with the State having had implemented a Stay Mediation hadnt been attended too or requested of the employer. The EEOC letter indicated the employer had objected too and failed too respond to the eeocs request to mediate. The eeoc case filing automatically filed with the State. The State, because of the implemented Stay was supposed to contact the entity or the counsel and TELL them, mediation was objected too and failed to be responded too, before the litigating of any proceedings, the mediation has to be attended too and a fine is the sanction of the state. Thus the State should have been notified of sanction and thus the case, when the Federal proceedings, began that then should have alerted them to the case and the counsel and the State. As a, twice with once as an advanced degree alumni of the State, the directing of the redirect of the State has me baffled, stumped, scared because I know Im right. Lawfully the State in two separate instances failed to sanction, adequately notify the employer as an entity licensee within the State, as the State. At the phase of IDES, mediation hadnt occurred. I over the phone and vis a vis informed the office of the IDES, I filed an eeoc case and in one instance the woman that scheduled the IDES, gave me the contact number of the contactee of the IDHR. Both departments should have looked into the file and contacted the employer AND request a revision of the itenerary to include the eeoc case, as I had told them I had filed an eeoc and hadnt heard back and only requested and expected reinstate. The retaliation is evidenced in the letters and write up, the mediation view of the State unredirected of the EEOC is evidenced in the letters, the States something or another peculiarity evidenced in their unrdirect and is evidenced in their letter, e.g. if a department is a department that every tme an eeoc case is filed has to partake in the process of the eeoc, mediation being objected too should be able to be identified and directed in the direction of appropriate of the State. Retaliation and mediation and summons and eeoc litigates and the structure and function of the itenerary and employer notification of sanctionings shouldnt be and the employer had changed their cause on the record of the State , unredirected of the State. With me as vis a vis, over the phone and in writing AND if a sanction, a sanction infers contact, and if a contacting THEN to notify of other case component peculiarities AS APPROPRIATE OF A STATE, would have been the appropriate response of A; to not had done so, a violation of the rights of the entity and the filee and the State as an entity, with the violation of the State classified as inter-entity, as with the other involved IDHR, IDES, CHR, EEOC and human resources of entity of file. The contact of the employer to alert of the case portion involvement of mediation objection and failure to be responded to, in conjunction with: retaliation, state substantives, eeoc litigates, summons, IDES, IDHR, EEOC, CHR processes, IS and was CRITICAL to the impartiality of the officiating of the proceedings of the State and Federal, especially when involving an employe of the State as vis a vis witness ith the knowledge that the employer and the State went on the record of the State with an omit that as an academic entity and a State was an obligatory highlight, and they went on the records of both Federal and State with intent and the intent is evidenced within the records of Federal and State. Mediation hadnt occurred, mediation had been objected and failed to be responded too when the employer went on the record of the State, the employer should have redirected the redirect and didnt include the eeoc filing in the itenerary of the State for a proceeding of which they went on the record: submitted an itenerary that didnt include the eeoc and idhr with only two write ups and a correspondence of humnan resources that evidences the retaliation AND the potentiality that the academic entity human resources might have been unrecognate of the classification and category of retaliation without superior to subordinate or subordinate to superior redirect evidenced to and of the State unrecognate of the human resources, State, IDHR, IDES, EEOC , CHR changed their cause WITHOUT the redirect of the State, the summons and lack therof of a summons on the recrd of the State unredirected of the human resources of tr the State in the State proceedig THEN the mediation redirect unredirected too of the State and court and counsel and BOTH instances with the State contact of the entity ideally reflective in the applicicacation of a form of appropriate in the form of a sanction of the entity from the State , inferenced of the State even if and when not inferenced too of the Statewithin the proceeding itself, mediation objected too and failed to be responded too unredirected of the eeoc and the State OR unrecognized by the eeoc and the State as relevant to the process of the eeoc and State , eeoc litigate, the objected too of the IDES within the court of Federal per the counsel of the employer WITH the unredirect of the mediation uninferenced of the employer AND unredirected too of the State , unredirected too of an academic entity of human resources AS APPROPRIATE OF AN ACADEMIC ENTITY HUMAN RESOURCES. In other words, with a case such as this, was the unredirect: because of fear, because of retaliate, with intent. With me as vis a vis. Then extremity evidenced, with extremity as default judgement plaintiff and the plaintiff identified as self. A manufactured bankruptcy. A FEDERAL COURT manufactured bankruptcy. Mediation objected too and failed to be responded too unredirected too of a State, with the unredirect, unredirected too of the human resources and entity counsel on the record of the courts of the Federal and the State, with me as vis a vis. When the appropriate is: State was supposed to redirect the human resources to redirect to the mediation objecting , lack of substantive evidence letter of IDHR , and State IDHR response, AS State Statute substantive being they were and are entities of the STATE , to not had done so with the unredirect being as extreme as it is, e.g. the filee entered the extremity into the records of the courts at the objection of the entity counsel, entity human resources and State with the filee as vis a vis witness to the unredirect of the State and human resources, with the entity as an academic entity and a State OBLIGATED to appropriately redirect and with their unredirect evidenced within the records of the court itself, e.g. if mediation hasnt occurred and was failed and objected to be responded too of the employer, why would not the State appropriately sanction at the time of the objection, considering the retaliation was evidenced of the human resources approximately 7 days before the eeoc letter with both being considered SOI substantive why would the eeoc not reidirect the IDHR to revise their letter and inquire of why it was they had written lack of substantive evidence inf the first place thus effecting the filee as whistleblower and witness and the State and EEOC thus by default notify the entity and alert the entity to the events of the case , AS APPROPRIATE OF A STATE, in the first place. It was the OBLIGATORY obligation of the State employees of the IDHR, EEOC and academic entity, and filee as an employee of a State school and avid 5USCA1211 tell or ask the court to inform the counsel to attend to the mediation and summons and eeoc litigates eeoc cases and retaliation as an instance of: the employer changed their cause on the record of the State without the redirect of the State or human resources or the courts to the employer, State or courts: the employer went on the records of State and Federal and hadnt told the State or Federal of the individual that had posted the inferred write ups verbatim content on the site uncited wasnt the filee, and as the employer was on the records of the State and Federal the content was on the site uncited, unredirected to of the State to the human resources or more importantly UNREDIRECTED TOO OF THE ACADEMIC ENTITY HUMAN RESOURCES TO THE STATE, with the filee as vis a vis witness (covert and uncovert 5USCA1211 to Lowe), HLC SCHOOLS CANNOT GO EXTERNAL FOR COUNSEL FOR A RETALIATION CASE UNRECOGNATE OF RETALIATION, MEDIATION RESPONSE, SUMMONS, EEOC LITIGATES, ONE JOB IN THE HIRE AT AN ACADEMIC ENTITY THAT REQUIES FACULTY AUTHOR IS AN EEOC CASE IN THE HIRE He whistled to someone else and they didnt do anything about it. He whistled to me fear of redirect or retaliate or intent, and not as an individual , he was at least one of twelve with me including myself within the group of the twelve. When at first reading the letters from Tom, I thought he was mocking my intelligence or experiencing a health crisis of some kind: he and Abe and Joan or someone internal to the school because the hire was an instance of a human resources yet the provost was an ABA, so I went in the direction of Lowe because of the health concern and human resources as his background and dilemma, that he really wouldnt talk about fluidly yet the inference to the workplace and human resources, write ups, instances of write ups, timing of write ups in proportion to mine and went in the direction of myself as state employee whistleblower, FULLY cognizant of retaliation, mediation, summons , his instances were a clear covert to me and as an employee of the State and Academic entities, I reported our instances AS APPROPRIATE. Thus we cannot be seperated with. The alignment of his instances to other instances in my case, with the baffling unredirect of the State wat junctures when the State should have ideally LEAPED to intervene, mediation objecting unviewed of an office of the State as substantive, mediation unredirected too and a contact because of a sanction or fine because of the objecting to the eeoc request hadnt occured, THEN the response of the IDHR to the counsel when the counsel had , should have realzed had mediation occurred, it should have occured and been redirected too BEFORE the IDES and was unredirected too of the human resources to the State and the State to the human resources. The external to entity counsel letter written to the IDHR requesting of someone named Castro, that the IDHR (Simms, Simms superviser, Roser, Castro , Novak , Goodwin, Rowe, AND the guys and females that I didnt get their names or that didnt redirect to the mediation, equating with > thats quite a bit of unredirect to the mediation, the sanction that should have occurred because of the objection to mediate thereby producing a contacting of the entity and instance of when the State could and should have informed the entity of mediation in proportion to the response of their human resources with the write up evidencing a clear case of retaliation thus mediation was more appropriate than a case and if a case than mediation a critical component to the case informally, and the IDHR internally to the lack of substantive evidence and and IDES to the aforementioned and summons,and the courts to instruct the filee, eeoc litigates and the counsel to he could not refuse mediation, considering the retaliation was written within the letters of correspondences and the State dept of IDES and IDHR responses and court comments and input shape the case as if they were either paid under the table to inappropriately rule, and possibly of human resources and counsel OR as with human resources there might have been health concerns, or as with the interpretation or fear or intent ) THE IDHR THAT HAD IMPLEMENTED A STAY, and the counsel said he was on the record of the court as a counsel for and of the school, with me as vis a vis. ; the State implemented a Stay and unredirected too mediation without the redirect of the counsel, court or entity , with the evidence of the retaliation written in the writing of the human resources, and the writing of the human resources having had been placed within the record of the State per the filee, at the objection of the counsel of the employer or human resources almost as IF, with the IDES record of State as equally as perplexing as when the State implemented a Stay, saw the counsel file into the case, knew the mediation had been objected and failed to be responded too and didnt redirect the court to direct the filee to eeoc litigates, or the counsel to attend to the aspect of mediation BECAUSE the evidenced employee and case filee having received IDES indicated nonfault of the filee in the State of IL and the IDES records were entered into the record of the Federal by the filee at the objection of the external to entity, counsel of the entity that should have entered the IDES record into the court and the IDES record entry was entered of the filee, and at the objection of the counsel that should have mediated, should have redirected to mediation and should have entered the IDES into the record of the Federal and State , as an obligated response of a State and the obligated response of a counsel for a school, counsel to the mediation and THEN allowed the counsel to incessantly continue to file, without the intercede of the filings directings and processes via the State . with the State having had implemented a Stay, with me as vis a vis witness, and filee, and whistleblower and State employee OBLIGATED to say something, I whistled on many many many many many things at CSU, programs, supervisers, I remember whistling to obtain a lifeguard for water classes, OT student fatigue i instance of death of student intercede, prevention of legal case IS mediation. mediation objected and failed to be responded too is extreme, extremity is a default judgment for a plaintiff, and a fine for an entity, retaliation was evidenced in writing, in the hand of the human resources and the State was supposed to have the file and be able to identify a classification of retaliation and extremity, and the State said lack of substantive evidence?. and this isnt something that should be considered as a whistle and whistleblowers arent supposed to be reetaliated against, and I am without my car, without a phone, without a cell, without internet, in need of 3838 Carey unboarded, with legislation enact, a State stay in place and a commision court order and someone at this juncture is yet unrecognate of retaliation against whistleblowers as they were with Lowe, e.g. you cannot terminate a whistleblower, you cannot retaliate against a whistleblower., extremity is a default judgement for a plaintiff. In a delicate instance where my whistleblower too was a whistle to me AND a witness to me not having had been apprehended in the courts and offices of State and Federal THAT if I should have been I hadnt been, in an instance where they seem to forget HE IS BOTH whisltle and witness, I hadnt been apprehended in either the EEOC, IDES, IDHR/CHR, Federal or State court, they had my ss number and my address. He called, I talked. I hadnt been apprehended. It wasnt planned that he call. The weekend of the IDES, he called and stopped by in the area. It wasnt planned, yet it highlighted I hadnt been apprehended. I have been exempt, since I was a baby.He is vis a vis he spoke with and saw me vis a vis. and if the city was empoyed by the eeoc to create the extremity,, when the eeoc of 2000 was filed in the office of the eeoc, the instance of eeoc hiring individuals to create extremity, without explaining to the employers that extremity is a default judgement for a plaintiff is as foul of a civil right office as foul could be, if and when the eeoc was unredirected of the entity to the extremity as default judgement for the plaintiff and unredirected of the State is a crime of State and Federal, against plaintiff as witness and whistleblower with whistle deemed as fact, because for the retaliation to be within the letter of eeoc and unrecognate and unredirected of entity, entity hr and eeoc and State is evidenced. Is my typing showing up in english?. manufactured unemployment and bankrupty unredirected of courts offices and counsel and academic entity, with Sate employee and commission seat as vis a vis witness and with legislation enact. Slept outside, yet without vehicle, phones, cell, commission court order says court order, commission court order says unopposed to relief sought, one job in the hire is a full eeoc case in the hire and retaliation in the correspondences of human resources when paired with the write up is evidence of retaliation , direction of entry of summons into the record of the State with the hr and State on the record of the State, courts and counsel is evidenced in the records of the courts, offices and human resources of Federal and State and entity. Peter Linden and Herb Kent, Edward Reed, Emil Jones, Sandra Westbrooks, extremity in books, cellphones, bill scripting, textbooks, a virus to the article reposit , NCU, the election, the music of the election, the music streamed into my carm the bccp, the ivy tech, the team skype, I havent refused reinstate, I wouldnt refuse reinstate, a whistle should be recognate per the individuals of the entity . the individuals of the entity are my vis a vis colleagues at CSU and other HLC and other non-HLC schools. I am without my phone, cell, vehicle, need my home of 3838 unboarded, havent authorized anyone to speak to the entity or refuse the entity and the court order says unopposed to relief sought. vthey manufactured a Federal Court Bankruptcy and unemployment and someone to someone else called this homicidal massacre of human resources , State courts, Federal courts and State and Federal offices, love. I said rec eipts to eeoc or State or IRS, I removed the imunity, priviledges and powers of courts and offices as appropriate, I sought peers and peer input, someone restricted my services, Doug Eder, Arne Duncan, gainful employment, a platform the entity introduced me too, Cheif inglewood is a real life police officer and superviser: ask him of mediation unredirected too of a State in a case of civil or the surelevance of a summons or lack therof of a summens being entered into the record of the State or the change of cause on the record of the State or the implementing of a stay with retaliation and mediation unredirected too of the human resources, State , Courts and Counsel on the records of the Federal and Court with me as vis a vis witness evidenced AND unredirected too of the State. fathom. on my mind.
Posted on: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 18:10:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015