ARE OR WERE YOU A VICTIM OF ...RETALIATION?

PART ONE...WHAT IS IT?...RETALIATION

An employer may not fire, demote, harass or otherwise "retaliate" against an individual for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in a discrimination proceeding, or otherwise opposing discrimination. The same laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, and disabilty, as well as wage differences between men and women performing substantially equal work, also prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose unlawful discrimination or participate in an employment discrimination proceeding.

In addition to the protections against retaliation that are included in all the laws that are enforced by EEOC, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also protects individuals from coercion, intimidation, threat, harassment, or interference in their exercise of their own rights or their encouragement of someone else's exercise of right granted by the ADA.

There are three main terms that are used to describe retaliation. Retaliation occurs when an employer, employment agency, or labor organization takes an adverse action against a covered individual because he or she engaged in a protected activity. We will explain and discuss these three terms tomorrow and how they may apply to you and where you can file a charge with the EEOC.

See you tomorrow.

Intimidation by...Deep Taxpayers Pockets in Woodstock Ill.

When the process initiated by Chief of Police, Robert W. Lowen, Jr. of Woodstock Illinois began by him filing a formal complaint against Sergeant Gorski with the City of Woodstock's Fire and Police Commission seeking his termination from the force that he served in for over 19 years I must confess I was somewhat depressed and angry that a single relatively new individual backed by a City (at least allegedly a few persons in high level positions) could allegedly con volute and change the true circumstances of a situation to serve their own self serving and financial interests respectively. The Sergeant understood that his oath of office was to the U.S. Constitution, the State, the County of McHenry and intimately with the people of Woodstock Illinois; he understood that his sworn duty was to the citizens and not to be a "team player of the Chief" and not to do things that he felt may have not been in the best interest of the citizens or his fellow officers. I guess he was just not viewed as one of "the good ol boys" that would go along with someone elses personal agenda.

My faith in the intrinsic goodness of most people was restored on February 4, 2008 when, after months of the Chief's and City's unilateral prosecution of Sergeant Gorski they, the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners, after several minutes of deliberation, found in favor of Sergeant Gorski after they were asked to consider a directed verdict (which means that Sergeant Gorski did not even present his side of the case or defend himself). They found in his favor 3 to 0 and ordered he be reinstated and all back pay with interest due him by State statute be paid immediately as possible. To date he and his family which includes three young daughters have not received a penny from the City....so much for 19 years of loyalty to the people. I've learned one thing from this fiasco and that is one individual and his backers may take the wrong path and they cannot give up because they will loose face and might fracture delicate egos. What reinforces that direction they take is that it costs them nothing....they don't pay the tab...you do the taxpayer. You pay the tab to the lawyers who think they have nothing to loose and the other individuals involved. Eventually the tab will be paid and it is usually the taxpayer who winds up paying that also...all this for something that need never have occurred.

The Chief could not accept the fact that the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners found in Sergeant Gorski's favor and filed for an Administrative Review with the 22 Judicial Circuit Court...more taxpayer dollars being spent. And the Saga of Sergeant Gorski goes on and his family and children must suffer because someone cannot accept the decision of his superiors.

The question remains: why even bother to have and fund a Board of Fire of Police Commissioners if their decision can be disobeyed by one alleged individual with someones alleged political backing? I hope that the tax payers of Woodstock get angry and upset and look into this matter that is draining their pockets and inappropriately causing severe hardship on a hard working cop's family. Someone other than me has to realize that it may be them in the cross hairs next time.