This is a copy of my Coaching Response
This is in response to my coaching for reporting outdated food that has cost the company money.
I believe that this action, is an act of discrimination, retaliation and reprisal for exercising my rights under the ADA, in violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and Sections 12203 (a) and 12203 (b) of the Act.
I believe that this is a spiteful and vindictive act by management taken towards the employees in the meat department to blame innocent employees for the acts or failure to act by management officials.in committing this act the company is protecting management officials.
I also believe that the company in giving all the employees in the meat department a formal written coaching, is using their own failure in allowing these incidents to happen and they are using me as a scapegoat. This action has already turned employees who are innocent of any wrong doing against me; this is a way for the company to take their reprisal and retaliate against me for exercising my rights under the law to file a complaint with the EEOC. The company is also violating a Consent Decree voluntarily entered into by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Wal-Mart") and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") in connection to the settlement in the case entitled EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. S99-0414 geb dad (e.D. Cal.).
I believe that this coaching is an arbitrary and capricious act to cover-up and conceal the failures of the managers of Sam's Club to do their job, and to intimidate, coerce and compel employees to refrain from reporting outdated meat which has cost the company monetary losses because of bad management practices.
I reported that sandwich meat was being used that was outdated three times before any appropriate action was taken. The meat was eighteen days outdated before corrective action was taken.
The cost to Sam's Club was apparently minimal and no action was taken by or against any management official concerning this first abuse that jeopardized the safety, health and wellbeing of our customers.
On another subsequent occasion I reported that sandwich meat was being used that was five days outdated.
The cost to Sam's Club was apparently minimal and no action was taken by or against any management official concerning this second abuse that jeopardized the safety, health and wellbeing of our customers.
I subsequently reported that a palette had four hundred and fifty chickens on it that was due to expire at midnight. I used forty of those chickens prior to their expiration date and the rest (four hundred and ten chickens) had to be thrown away.
The cost to Sam's Club was apparently substantial enough this time and the action that is being taken by management officials concerning this abuse that jeopardized the safety, health and wellbeing of our customers is to give a formal coaching to all the employees in the meat department for management failing to do its job which resulted in our customers eating meat that was outdated, and what appears to be of much greater concern to management officials than that is the cost to the company for having to get rid of the four hundred and ten outdated chickens.
I was the person who noticed that these illegal and potentially dangerous acts were occurring. I sought corrective action from management and only got reprisals.
Nothing is more apparent than this action combined with the reasons stated above and the act of punishing me for taking action to protect the health and wellbeing of our customers.
I am being punished for protecting our customers and for reporting that management is failing to protect the customers or Sam's Clubs property.
This is like punishing a door greeter for catching someone who was attempting to steal merchandise from the store.
I protected our MOST VALUABLE ASSET. Our customers. And I and other hourly employees are being punished because it is easier to punish a group of hourly employees than to punish and hold accountable a management official.
As I have stated above, I think it is inappropriate to punish a door greeter for preventing the unlawful removal of merchandise from the store.
I attempted to prevent the unlawful removal of property from the store (outdated sandwich meat that was eighteen days old) by reporting it to management.
I attempted to prevent the unlawful removal of property from the store (outdated sandwich meat that was five days old) by reporting it to management.
I DID prevent the unlawful removal of property from the store (four hundred and ten outdated chickens) by reporting it to management.
The only job description that I had been given was that of door greeter. And I feel that I was doing what my job required, and I believe that management should have been doing what their job required.
I never signed any document which stated that I was capable of performing any duties or job other than that of a door greeter until the last week of October which I was then given a Job Description for Rotisserie Associate.
I believe that in this matter there are violations of the values that Sam Walton called the Three Basic Beliefs:
1. Respect for the Individual
2. Service to our Customers
3. Strive for Excellence
1. The violation of Respect for the Individual has occurred by giving hourly employees a coaching for management not taking appropriate steps to insure the safety of our most valuable assetOur Customers
2. The violation of Service to our Customers has occurred by selling our customers Sandwich Rings with meat that was outdated.
3. The violation of Strive for Excellence occurred by management not taking corrective action to insure that we had a commitment to Respect for the Individual and Service to our Customers, instead of the autocratic attitude of attempting to show an impressive record of sales and profits without regards to giving our customers what Sam Walton called the Three Basic Beliefs.
I would be willing to take a lie detector test to prove that I was not responsible for allowing the meat to become outdated or for allowing our customers to buy it to be consumed.
I would even pay for this test myself, provided that after I pass it, the company will reimburse me.
I believe that other hourly employees in the meat department would be willing to do the same thing.
I also believe that management officials should likewise agree and submit to taking a lie detector test for the same purpose.
Respectfully submitted,
*
The original Coaching Response was given to the General Manager of the store, Bill Eltz.
A copy of the original Coaching Response was sent to:
Kerry Harmon 11-09-2203
Gregory Spragg 11-11-2203
Kevin Turner 11-14-2203
Tom Coughlin 11-19
I was subsequently fired from the company on 01-07 under the pretext that I had an unsatisfactory performance.
For my 3 moth evaluation I got a 16 out of 16, the highest rating possible.
For my 6 moth evaluation I got a 16 out of 16, the highest rating possible.
For my 12 moth evaluation I got a 06 out of 16.
I told them that my first two evaluations of 16 and 16 gave me a rating of 16 for the first half of the year.
If my first 6 months came to a 16 and if I got a ZERO for the last six months, my yearly evaluation would be an 8. I said there was not way that I could get a yearly evaluation of 6.
I told them that they were retaliating against me and taking reprisals towards me under false pretext.
Also, during this last six months, on 04-07 I got an Associates Commendation. I was given a $1.00 an hour pay raise.
It does not make sense to give someone a $1.00 an hour pay raise for unsatisfactory performance.
The pay raise I got was prior to my raising the issue of Wal-Mart not complying with a United States Federal District Court Judges Court Ordered Consent Decree.
Someone had been giving false certification that Wal-Mart was complying with the Court Ordered Consent Decree to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a United States Federal District Court Judge.
Someone in the company was committing FRAUD.
Lou
Parkville, Maryland
U.S.A.
0 comments