Boycott NRA, Never Again, Ban Assault Weapons

     My husband and I are 73 years young. We are enthusiastic gun owners, sporting clay shooters and hunters of deer, small game, pheasants, ducks and geese. Between sporting clays and hunting, we shoot for 8 months of the year. We own more than a dozen guns including rifles, shotguns and handguns. We only shoot what we like to eat and we eat everything we shoot (except the clay birds - too damn tough)! Three freezers are essential - and we share our bounty with kids and grandkids.
     While we have never been NRA members, we recognize that the organization does some good stuff - fire arm safety for kids, shooting ranges, etc. However, the recent high school mass shooting on February 14, 2018 in Parkland, Florida, was the last straw! Too many "thoughts and prayers," too many times and the NRA blocks all action on gun control! So I tweeted #BoycottNRA and in two days it went viral!
     No true sportsman or woman needs an AR 15, a bump stock or any other assault weapon or gun that uses high capacity magazines. They are weapons of war and have only one purpose - to kill and maim as many people as fast as possible! We need to get these weapons off our streets, out of our churches, theaters, night clubs, schools, concerts, shopping malls, etc. Folks who want to shoot these weapons should go to licensed shooting ranges or join the army!
     We support the boycott on the NRA until the organization is willing to compromise on limiting private access to assault weapons. The NRA has consistently blocked all efforts to pass sensible gun legislation that the majority of Americans support. It has used its resources to intimidate any who oppose their agenda. The organization's influence has been disproportionate to its membership because elected officials have allowed it to be so. That has to stop. The NRA kills compromise! Boycott the NRA!

The Good Cops Need to Speak Up!

What has happened recently to black men in Baltimore, New York City, Ferguson, ETC. has to stop! That kind of racist and immoral police behavior has been going on for far too long in poor neighborhoods, behind closed doors and inside locked vans.  I refuse to believe black teens and black men have to fear all cops.  I believe the majority of the police forces are good men and women doing a very difficult and dangerous job.

However, good cops are being demoralized by the media treatment following these incidents.  That will continue unless they speak up!  The only way to stop these horrific incidents and restore public trust in the police forces is if the good cops take a stand!  POLICE YOURSELVES! Drop the blue wall of silence, forget about omertà. What's right is not always popular and what's popular is not always right.  All is takes for the evil to prevail is for the good cops to say nothing!

Re-Segregated Schools - For Shame!

Recent national reports indicate that many schools across the country, most particularly in the south, are more segregated today than they were when Brown v. Board of Education was decided in 1954. How we forget our history! It's also due in large part to the school choice movement. Many of the choices, including charters, open enrollment, and various form of vouchers were creative ways to get around integration requirements. I warned about this in the book MYTHS OF EDUCATIONAL CHOICE in 1992 - but I forgot to warn about the consequences of forgetting our history. Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it - something like that!!

Government Shutdown - What Hypocrisy!

Republican Speaker Boehner announced tonight, just minutes before the deadline for a federal government shutdown, that a deal had been reached. He said that they (Republicans & Tea Partiers) had fought to cut government spending. Therein lies the total hypocrisy! The news all day long was about Planned Parenthood and abortion, not budget and spending. Senator Kyle said that abortion was 90% of the work of Planned Parenthood. That's not even close to accurate! FYI, Planned Parenthood does cancer screening, women's health, and birth control - which ironically reduces the number of abortions. The amount they wanted cut from Planned Parenthood - that held up the deal and threatened to keep pay from military families - is a tiny, insignificant part of the budget. The Republicans have been all about political and social issues, not the budget. Watch what they do, not what they say!

Wonder where their budget concerns were when we went into Iraq? And Bush pushed tax cuts with two wars ongoing?? Wonder what Iraq has cost us anyway? Wonder what the cost has been of taking the focus away from Afghanistan in 2003? Wonder why all the GOP noise about budget and spending ignores the costs of the wars started under GOP administrations?

Class Action Essential for Walmart

Most women - hell, most people of any protected class - cannot afford to challenge their employer individually. Even when they try, most drop out of the impossibly long, complicated, demeaning process long before any resolution for or against. We almost lost our house before winning the first federal lawsuit on job discrimination and then simply could not afford to appeal a bad summary judgment decision on the second lawsuit on discrimination and retaliation. There will be no justice for the 1.5 million Walmart women if there is not class action status. Any doubts, read the book PLAINTIFF BLUES, which describes just how difficult challenging can be for an individual.

Retaliation Rising!

The number of retaliation claims skyrocketed 55 percent between 2000 and 2009, from 21,613 to 33,613 claims, respectively, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In 2010, for the first time ever, retaliation under all statutes (36,258) surpassed race (35,890) as the most frequently filed charge, according to the EEOC. Retaliation claims currently account for 36 percent of all EEOC charges--the highest percent yet. Simply put, the number of claims have risen because the amount of retaliation is rising.

Why is this? BECAUSE RETALIATION WORKS! The problem with the laws against job discrimination is that they all require that the victim stand up and file a complaint. That makes the victim vulnerable to retaliation. As the Supreme Court finally acknowledged in Burlington Northern v Costas in 2006, there are a myriad of ways an employer can intimidate and retaliate against employees. Once this happens to a complaining employee in the workplace, all other employees run for cover. It has a "chilling effect" on the willingness of others to complain or cooperate in any investigation.

WARNING - RETALIATION WORKS!

Why UNIONS?

Forget history at your own peril. The traditional concept is "Those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them." There were long, bitter and violent battles to earn the right to collectively bargain, to have unions, to strike. These union rights were part of riding us of child labor, protecting worker safety, challenging job discrimination, securing better wages and benefits - the list goes on. But a generation passes and those memories are lost! We take what our parents and grandparents fought for for granted. It was unions that launched the successful rise of the middle class in America and it is the loss of unions that is part of the growing gap between rich and poor in this country. The U S Census reported in 2009, "The top-earning 20% of Americans — those making more than $100,000 each year — received 49.4% of all income generated in the U.S., compared with the 3.4% earned by those below the poverty line, according to newly released Census figures. That ratio of 14.5-to-1 was an increase from 13.6 in 2008 and nearly double a low of 7.69 in 1968."

That's why unions!

Huge Respect for Egyptians

It is thrilling today to watch the news of the revolution from Egypt. What courage it took for those on the street! (Older folks will remember similar scenes of tanks in the street from Tiananmem Square in 1989.) Today in Egypt gives a whole new meaning to the adage, "there's strength in numbers." It also gives emphasis to the power of the press (including the new social media). If the international reporters had not risked and stayed the course in Cairo's Tahrir Square, the protesters in the streets might not have felt so empowered or the government forces so restrained. One can only hope now that history will not repeat itself, as Santayana warned, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Hopefully, this revolution will not proceed as it did for Robespierre and the French Revolution, "La revolution devoure ses enfants," but will progress like the American Revolution. General Washington became a President, not a King.

Judges and Justice

There have been several news reports about the shortage of federal judges in recent years. Why is that? Gridlock in the senate! The opposition party simply refuses to allow Presidential appointments to be confirmed. One senator has been able to simply put a secret "hold" on a nomination and nothing happens. The problem then becomes the tendency of the existing federal judges to use summary judgement to help clear the backlogged docket. And that's not justice! The U S Senate needs to clean up its act, reform itself and get about the nation's business.

PLAINTIFF BLUES Spring Book Sale

PLAINTIFF BLUES is the true story we just had to tell. After several false starts with traditional publishers and editors, self-publishing seemed the only option. Our experience with www.selfpublishing.com was just exceptional. The service was terrific. A book coach was free and answered every question promptly. Every bill was as quoted or less, every time estimate was right-on or early. PLAINTIFF BLUES was self-published in 2007 and won awards in 5 different categories in 2008. Since then, the book has been reprinted and sold more than enough copies to pay all the publishing bills and provide for a couple of "revenge" vacations to boot! (Check the revenge link www.plaintiffblues.com on the website) I've had wonderful experiences at book signings, book clubs and other speaking engagements. The book is always available online as a POD (print-on-demand) book from all the major websites including Amazon (including Kindle version), Barnes and Noble, etc.

However, several books remain from the last, off-set printing and we want to make them available to more readers. We have dropped the prices for the remaining books by 40% (including shipping). The rates are even lower for multiple copies - which will work well for book clubs or other groups.
Go to www.plaintiffblues.com to order.

Judicial Activism - Very Interesting!

Obviously, judicial activism is much like beauty or happiness. Either it's in the "eye of the beholder" or "it's a state of mind." The other possibility is that all political reference to the judiciary is hypocritical at best. Conservatives view any judicial decision allowing gay marriage as "judicial activism." Liberals view judicial decisions overturning Obamacare as "judicial activism." The one judicial hypocracy that stands out from the rest is Bush v. Gore (2000). Recall that five, states'-rights, conservative justices shot down the State of Florida to put Bush in the White House.

Obamacare PLEASE!

Opponents of the current health care reform call it socialized medicine and say they don't want the government coming between them and their doctor. They want to keep the current "free enterprise" system we have and be able to see whatever doctor they want and have access to all the care modern science can provide.

They are living in a mythical world. The only institution that ever comes between me and my doctors is my insurance company. I have heard my doctors complain on several occasions about having to get permission from the insurance company for a particular test or treatment they wanted to prescribe. After the third broken ankle, the doctor wanted me to have a bone scan to check for possible osteoporosis - only to be told by the insurance company that they wouldn't pay for the test unless I had a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Isn't that Catch-22?

As it is today, my insurance company stands squarely between me and my doctor. They decide what drugs I take, what doctors I see and what treatments I can have. They do it for profit! Before I retired, I couldn't even chose my insurance company because it was provided by my employer. Where's the private enterprise in all this? We have no choices anyway. Need a hew hip? Try shopping around for the best quality or the best deal! You can't get a single doctor or clinic or hospital to quote you prices - where's the private enterprise - competition - in all of this?

Opponents of Obamacare warn of government rationing of health care. Just another part of their mythical world. Rationing already exists, only it's done by income status and the insurance companies. Let's have some fairness - Obamacare is a good start.

Stewart Restores Sanity - AGAIN!

Following the tragic events in Tucson, Arizona this past weekend, the airwaves were filled with all kinds of agonized hand-ringing and polarized finger-pointing - culminating in the all encompassing idiocy, "we're all to blame." The most sincere, sane expression of the horror and confusion we all felt, without any of the nonsense, came from Jon Stewart in his opening monologue on the Daily Show, Monday, January 10, 2011. "We can't outsmart crazy." How ironic, that it takes a comedian on a fake news show to get it right!

Who Needs A Glock?

The tragic events in Tucson got me to think about my guns and gun ownership. I own several guns and would fight to protect my ownership thereof. But I don't love or worship my guns as it seems so many NRA folks do. I simply enjoy the activities that the guns are a part of. I also own three freezers that contain the fish and game we harvest. And I love figuring out how to prepare and cook this bounty. Check out the Living Well link under the list of Revenge Links on the lower left-hand side to see pictures of some of our "harvesting" adventures.

However, I do not own a semi-automatic 9 mm Glock. I can't imagine a reason to use one. Seriously, who needs one? What possible legitimate reason can there be for anyone to own or carry or conceal a semi-automatic hand gun or an AK47 or any other automatic weapon? Why do our laws allow such easy access for people to buy these kinds of guns that have absolutely no legitimate use? Near as I can tell, the only thing these automatic weapons are good for is killing a lot of people quickly. We need to get rid of the easy access to these killing machines

The Real Problem in Washington

Why can't Congress get together and pass legitimate health care reform? Why can't Congress pass a energy policy that makes sense for the 21st century? Why can't Congress enact the necessary regulatory reforms to prevent another Wall Street meltdown? Pick any number of similar questions related to needed solutions for the common good - the answer's always the same. It's the money! Until we get the corrupting money out of campaign finance - so our representatives speak for us and not the interests that bought and paid for them, the answer's always going to be the same - it's the money!

Fire All The Teachers - How Unprofessional!

The current action of the Central Falls, Rhode Island, Superintendent and School Board to fire all 100 teachers in the "chronically underperforming" public high school is the most outrageous and unprofessional I've read about in a long time. It violates a central principle of good classroom discipline taught in all teacher preparation programs - don't punish the entire group for the actions of a few. It's not fair and the everyone knows it! When the socio-economic status of the Central Falls student body (the most significant factor in student achievement) is compared with other public high schools in the state, one has to wonder if this school board action wasn't more about contract negotiations than it was about student performance?

Living Well is the Best Revenge

My book, Plaintiff Blues, explains my desire for revenge and the fishing and hunting pictures on revenge page of the website illustrate my belief that living well is the best revenge. Shortly after my last post on April 5, 2009, I found additional motivation for working hard at living well. Life is too short to waste not living well! In the book, I briefly described a heart attack I experienced in 1999, followed by two stents. It was a bit of a wake-up call and a significant part of my reason for taking an early retirement from secondary school administration in 2001. This was at age 58. I've done some university adjunct instructing since then, but as the revenge pictures show, there's been a lot of living well since 2001. Ducks, geese, pheasant, deer, moose, tuna, salmon, halibut, walleye, bass, lake trout, muskie, catfish, mahi mahi - they're all there.

However, on April 7, 2009, I woke up with some minor chest pain and went to the ER, expecting another couple of stents. Not so easy this time. The angiogram diagnosis was severe CAD (coronary artery disease). The open heart surgery performed on Aril 9, 2009, included seven CABG's (coronary artery bypass grafts). Living well now took on a whole new dimension. Some minor setbacks kept me in cardiac rehab until September. However, by October we were back living well again. I caught the 51" muskie in early October, shot a limit of Canada Geese later in October and was there when the family caught the mahi mahi in December. Check the last three pictures on the revenge page of www.plaintiffblues.com.
Living well sure works for me.

How can I retaliate? Let me count the ways!

As I indicated in my previous post, I've heard personal stories about many retaliatory actions against employees who dared to complain about discrimination. Most of them were less severe than "ultimate adverse employment actions," but nevertheless, extremely effective! The employer/supervisor writes negative evaluations, initiates surveillance on an employee, transfers employee to an undesirable job site, works with the union behind the employee's back, installs time clocks, threatens to counter sue, refuses leave requests, refuses to follow contractual grievance procedures, assigns permanent night-shift, ignores negotiated seniority rights, reassigns work space, cuts budget allocations, harasses or embarrasses employee in front of peers, refuses to return calls or emails in a timely manner, skips customary annual bonus, writes or gives negative recommendations to potential employers, withholds support of initiatives - the list is endless. It's limited only by the employer's imagination. Of course, any of the actions listed above may or may not be retaliatory in the legal, actionable sense of the term. It depends on the particular circumstances and how other comparable employees were treated. But the point is - beware! Retaliatory actions are most often subtle, covert, and insidious - which also makes them very difficult to prove - and very effective!

Chilling, isn't it?

Retaliation's Chilling Effects

Since publishing Plaintiff Blues: Job Discrimination and the Chilling Effects of Retaliation in 2007 and posting this blog, I've received numerous phone calls and emails from folks about discrimination and retaliation.The majority of these communications involve personal stories of discrimination and retaliation. These stories contained disturbing, common patterns.

"I didn't file a complaint because I'm afraid of retaliation," was the most frequent comment I received. This fear is the single most chilling effect of retaliation. It also answers the most common question asked about discrimination/retaliation in the workplace, "How can they get away with it?"

The EEOC manual on Retaliation reads, "Effective enforcement of the anti-discrimination statutes depends in large part on the initiative of individuals to oppose employment practices that they reasonably believe to be unlawful and to file charges of discrimination. If retaliation for such activities were permitted to go unremedied, it would have a chilling effect upon the willingness of individuals to speak out against employment discrimination."

So our state and federal governments have passed laws against job discrimination. But enforcement of these laws requires individuals to step up and file charges against their employer. To do so, employees risk retaliation. Any doubt why retaliation reigns as the number one defensive strategy of employers accused of discrimination?

Although protections against retaliation are included in most of the anti-discrimination statues and have been strengthened by recent Supreme Court decisions, for years most lower courts used very restrictive definitions of retaliation. These definitions or standards insisted that the challenged, retaliatory employer action qualify as an ultimate, adverse employment action such as hiring, firing, promoting, and compensating.

In the 2006 Burlington Northern v White decision, the Supreme Court broadened the protections to include less severe retaliatory actions. In this case the Court said that retaliation included employment actions that would have, "dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination."

Yes, this is not a very precise standard or definition of what constitutes retaliation. However, any challenged act of retaliation depends on the particular circumstances. Context matters. For example, a simple schedule change may not matter to most workers, but may make a huge difference to a mother with school age children. A supervisor's excluding an employee from lunch may be just a trivial, nonactionable, and petty slight. But if that were a weekly training lunch that contributes to the employee's professional advancement, it may be an action that would deter a reasonable employee from complaining or supporting a complaint of discrimination.

Another pattern emerged from the contacts I've had. Several said they had filed the initial complaint but dropped it because they found themselves standing alone. Their co-workers were unwilling to support them or testify on their behalf because they were also afraid of retaliation. Another said, "I could have handled it myself, but I didn't want to put others - peers, co-workers, friends - in the bull's eye." Many said they knew what to expect if they complained about discrimination or retaliation because they had seen the treatment others got and wanted no part of it.

It's important to note that the same protections from retaliation that apply to the original complaining party also apply to anyone to participates in the investigation. However, those participants would have to stand up one additional time to initiate their own complaint if they experienced retaliatory actions.

Chilling, isn't it?