Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: Rita vs. Railroad

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Kayleigh,

Thanks so much for your input. I've been terribly anxious and depressed

over the proposed settlement, and I want to try to make the best of a bad

situation. Your comments are very helpful.

To answer your questions: Yes, my company (a commuter train and bus

service) is part of a state transportation agency. As a " public service " of

sorts, its existence is guaranteed; therefore it's not expected to be

self-supporting through passenger fares, and is heavily subsidized by " mass

transit " funds earmarked by the state legislature. Accountability for how these

monies are used seems to be minimal. Both the company EAP and the outpatient

" treatment " program it mandates are paid for out of the operating budget, i.e.

" in whole or in part by funds from the New York State Treasury " which is what

gave me grounds to sue for Establishment Clause violations as a state taxpayer.

Unfortunately there is no money riding on this kind of suit. In similar

suits against state-mandated 12-step participation, there have been nominal

damages of 1 dollar awarded. Being damaged by being forced to listen to insipid

12-step religious dogma doesn't have a monetary value attached, and the fact

that I was incompetently diagnosed and sent for worthless and unnecessary

treatment is beyond the scope of a constitutional claim. " Wrongful discharge " ,

which might interest the EEOC, doesn't apply because I was never fired; in fact,

I was never officially under suspension or any other kind of disciplinary

action. My status for 7 1/2 months was " unpaid leave of absence due to medical

treatment. " These bastards make themselves sound magnanimous -- " We don't

punish you, we help you! "

Anyway, the federal suit was for injunctive and declaratory relief from

12-step participation as a condition of state employment (tho he asked for

damages anyway just for the heck of it). But I never intended for this to be

the only corrective action I took. Yes, we had gotten to the discovery stage;

that's when I saw the bizarre things in my treatment records, as well as hearing

in the treatment counselors' deposition that all patients referred by my

agency's EAP are given identical 9-month treatment irrespective of symptoms or

history; I thought there might be a fraud/malpractice issue there that I could

pursue. Also, " CEAP " is a national certification, and the Employee Assistance

Professionals Association has a detailed code of professional conduct, and an

official and involved complaint and disciplinary process. I filed an 8-page

complaint to them, carefully wording it to have no overlap with the suit (which

is forbidden by EAPA rules) by addressing only Mr. Creep's substandard

diagnostic evaluation and unjustified treatment and no-work mandate.

THAT is what the company is demanding I withdraw. They desperately want to

retain the right to keep employees out of work and in punitive, degrading

" treatment " for protracted periods of time based on a single d/a test. They are

quite willing to drop the XA requirement if they can keep the _real_ power.

" Future action " of course refers to actions or complaints relating to my EAP

involvement from 10/97 to 9/98. I almost wish he would break my jaw tomorrow,

at least then I could have him dethroned. It makes me sick to drop the

misconduct complaint and let him come up smelling roses, but I'm painted into a

corner financially: if I don't settle, I'm stuck with the legal fees. The

settlement requires the company to pay all fees.

I don't know the exact wording of the proposed settlement. My attorney

said he's pushing for a proviso that all EAP victims be given a written

statement advising them that 12-step programs are religious in nature and that

they may refuse to attend meetings or instructional sessions that promote that

ideology. The hospital has already removed the step posters from the walls and

instructed the staff to use phrases like " 12-step meetings or alternative

recovery meetings of your choice " when " counseling " people on what is

" necessary " to stay sober. Nonsensical, of course, but not 12-step coercion.

The hospital definitely does not want to lose that gravy-train contract with my

agency; I think they'd go bankrupt without it. So no Steps it is. Several

hard-core stepper counselors have already resigned. So I suppose my suit

actually has inspired a

tiny bit of change.

Untouched in the settlement is my civil service grievance (my blood alcohol

was below the prohibited level, so according to our labor contract I never

should have been removed from service or sent to the EAP) because this is

considered a collective bargaining issue, not an EAP issue. This will be

decided by an impartial labor arbitrator. If I win, I get back ALL my back pay,

sick leave, vacation etc. for the time I was out, plus possibly the " alcoholism "

diagnosis and all reference to " treatment " might be removed from my work record.

That would be really wild if that 8/1000 of a point technicality ended up

getting me the most mileage!

Thanks for hearing me out, I'm feeling a bit better already.

~Rita

--------------------------------------------------

> Hi, Rita,

>

> It is a good sign that your company wants to settle, but there are a couple

things that I see as red flags.

>

> " Future " complaints: I hope the language is a lot tighter than this.

Retaliatory moves should be excepted, also complaints that are not the subject

of your current lawsuit. What if he breaks your jaw? Will you be allowed to

complain? Against him personally for medical expense and pain and suffering?

To the police for the assault? To his licensing board (whatever that may be)

for unethical behavior?

>

> Not " forcing anyone into 12-step treatment " : Who will monitor this? How will

anyone be sure that they are not? They have a contract with their present

12-step provider; is that provider a party to the lawsuit? If not, isn't the

contract still valid? Are they required to contract with the lowest bidder?

What if, in future, the lowest bidder is a 12-step provider? I have gotten the

impression that your employer is a state agency, tho I may be wrong, but if I am

right, note that state agencies are bound by numerous federal and state

regulations regarding procurement, which your lawsuit probably cannot affect.

>

> As to this issue, too, note that most treatment providers will insist they are

not 12-step programs, and AA will insist they have no affiliation with treatment

programs (because they " have no opinion on outside issues " ). Somehow treatment

providers and AA have gotten people to buy into this notion for years. This is

a huge loophole, and permits the treatment provider to continue to promote AA

and the 12-steps while your employer can state that they are not forcing anyone

to participate in a 12-step program.

>

> Perhaps you and your lawyer have thought of all these things, and probably the

settlement language is tighter than your letter suggests. But even then -- what

about monetary damages for you? Surely you deserve more than a change of

behavior on your employer's part, which you probably will not even be able to

verify.

>

> I don't know how far you have progressed into the lawsuit, whether it is only

at the complaint stage, whether there have been motions to dismiss and if so,

whether those motions were denied, whether there has been discovery and if so,

how much, and so forth. If your employer wants to settle, however, you have the

upper hand, so wring them out. This is not a stone you are bleeding, it is a

living, breathing, human institution.

>

> ---

> Kayleigh

>

> Zz

> zZ

> |\ z _,,,---,,_

> /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_

> |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'

> '---''(_/--' `-'\_)

>--------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to be a week late getting to this, I've been too busy to read e-mail and

the volume is intimidating.

Having read what you say, I think the settlement may be a good thing. If

counselors have resigned, if the hospital is complying with certain conditions

without the settlement having been implemented, you have accomplished a hell of

a lot more than most. Mr. Creep's career is on the line, and you have made him

sweat bullets, no doubt. Also, your union complaint may (hopefully WILL) get

you the $$ you deserve. It should, because your company obviously transgressed.

Is it really so awful if your company can still refer people to treatment but

the 12 steps are not mandated? That should relieve them of the Procrustean 9

mo. treatment.

Am I overlooking something here? I think you are in a good position.

---

Kayleigh

Zz

zZ

|\ z _,,,---,,_

/,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_

|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'

'---''(_/--' `-'\_)

>

>Kayleigh,

>

> Thanks so much for your input. I've been terribly anxious and depressed

over the proposed settlement, and I want to try to make the best of a bad

situation. Your comments are very helpful.

>

> To answer your questions: Yes, my company (a commuter train and bus

service) is part of a state transportation agency. As a " public service " of

sorts, its existence is guaranteed; therefore it's not expected to be

self-supporting through passenger fares, and is heavily subsidized by " mass

transit " funds earmarked by the state legislature. Accountability for how these

monies are used seems to be minimal. Both the company EAP and the outpatient

" treatment " program it mandates are paid for out of the operating budget, i.e.

" in whole or in part by funds from the New York State Treasury " which is what

gave me grounds to sue for Establishment Clause violations as a state taxpayer.

>

> Unfortunately there is no money riding on this kind of suit. In similar

suits against state-mandated 12-step participation, there have been nominal

damages of 1 dollar awarded. Being damaged by being forced to listen to insipid

12-step religious dogma doesn't have a monetary value attached, and the fact

that I was incompetently diagnosed and sent for worthless and unnecessary

treatment is beyond the scope of a constitutional claim. " Wrongful discharge " ,

which might interest the EEOC, doesn't apply because I was never fired; in fact,

I was never officially under suspension or any other kind of disciplinary

action. My status for 7 1/2 months was " unpaid leave of absence due to medical

treatment. " These bastards make themselves sound magnanimous -- " We don't

punish you, we help you! "

>

> Anyway, the federal suit was for injunctive and declaratory relief from

12-step participation as a condition of state employment (tho he asked for

damages anyway just for the heck of it). But I never intended for this to be

the only corrective action I took. Yes, we had gotten to the discovery stage;

that's when I saw the bizarre things in my treatment records, as well as hearing

in the treatment counselors' deposition that all patients referred by my

agency's EAP are given identical 9-month treatment irrespective of symptoms or

history; I thought there might be a fraud/malpractice issue there that I could

pursue. Also, " CEAP " is a national certification, and the Employee Assistance

Professionals Association has a detailed code of professional conduct, and an

official and involved complaint and disciplinary process. I filed an 8-page

complaint to them, carefully wording it to have no overlap with the suit (which

is forbidden by EAPA rules) by addressing only Mr. Creep's substandard

diagnostic evaluation and unjustified treatment and no-work mandate.

>

> THAT is what the company is demanding I withdraw. They desperately want

to retain the right to keep employees out of work and in punitive, degrading

" treatment " for protracted periods of time based on a single d/a test. They are

quite willing to drop the XA requirement if they can keep the _real_ power.

" Future action " of course refers to actions or complaints relating to my EAP

involvement from 10/97 to 9/98. I almost wish he would break my jaw tomorrow,

at least then I could have him dethroned. It makes me sick to drop the

misconduct complaint and let him come up smelling roses, but I'm painted into a

corner financially: if I don't settle, I'm stuck with the legal fees. The

settlement requires the company to pay all fees.

>

> I don't know the exact wording of the proposed settlement. My attorney

said he's pushing for a proviso that all EAP victims be given a written

statement advising them that 12-step programs are religious in nature and that

they may refuse to attend meetings or instructional sessions that promote that

ideology. The hospital has already removed the step posters from the walls and

instructed the staff to use phrases like " 12-step meetings or alternative

recovery meetings of your choice " when " counseling " people on what is

" necessary " to stay sober. Nonsensical, of course, but not 12-step coercion.

The hospital definitely does not want to lose that gravy-train contract with my

agency; I think they'd go bankrupt without it. So no Steps it is. Several

hard-core stepper counselors have already resigned. So I suppose my suit

actually has inspired a

>tiny bit of change.

>

> Untouched in the settlement is my civil service grievance (my blood

alcohol was below the prohibited level, so according to our labor contract I

never should have been removed from service or sent to the EAP) because this is

considered a collective bargaining issue, not an EAP issue. This will be

decided by an impartial labor arbitrator. If I win, I get back ALL my back pay,

sick leave, vacation etc. for the time I was out, plus possibly the " alcoholism "

diagnosis and all reference to " treatment " might be removed from my work record.

That would be really wild if that 8/1000 of a point technicality ended up

getting me the most mileage!

>

> Thanks for hearing me out, I'm feeling a bit better already.

>~Rita

>

>--------------------------------------------------

>

>> Hi, Rita,

>>

>> It is a good sign that your company wants to settle, but there are a couple

things that I see as red flags.

>>

>> " Future " complaints: I hope the language is a lot tighter than this.

Retaliatory moves should be excepted, also complaints that are not the subject

of your current lawsuit. What if he breaks your jaw? Will you be allowed to

complain? Against him personally for medical expense and pain and suffering?

To the police for the assault? To his licensing board (whatever that may be)

for unethical behavior?

>>

>> Not " forcing anyone into 12-step treatment " : Who will monitor this? How

will anyone be sure that they are not? They have a contract with their present

12-step provider; is that provider a party to the lawsuit? If not, isn't the

contract still valid? Are they required to contract with the lowest bidder?

What if, in future, the lowest bidder is a 12-step provider? I have gotten the

impression that your employer is a state agency, tho I may be wrong, but if I am

right, note that state agencies are bound by numerous federal and state

regulations regarding procurement, which your lawsuit probably cannot affect.

>>

>> As to this issue, too, note that most treatment providers will insist they

are not 12-step programs, and AA will insist they have no affiliation with

treatment programs (because they " have no opinion on outside issues " ). Somehow

treatment providers and AA have gotten people to buy into this notion for years.

This is a huge loophole, and permits the treatment provider to continue to

promote AA and the 12-steps while your employer can state that they are not

forcing anyone to participate in a 12-step program.

>>

>> Perhaps you and your lawyer have thought of all these things, and probably

the settlement language is tighter than your letter suggests. But even then --

what about monetary damages for you? Surely you deserve more than a change of

behavior on your employer's part, which you probably will not even be able to

verify.

>>

>> I don't know how far you have progressed into the lawsuit, whether it is only

at the complaint stage, whether there have been motions to dismiss and if so,

whether those motions were denied, whether there has been discovery and if so,

how much, and so forth. If your employer wants to settle, however, you have the

upper hand, so wring them out. This is not a stone you are bleeding, it is a

living, breathing, human institution.

>>

>> ---

>> Kayleigh

>>

>> Zz

>> zZ

>> |\ z _,,,---,,_

>> /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_

>> |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'

>> '---''(_/--' `-'\_)

>

> >--------------------------------------------------------

>

>------------------------------------------------------------------------

>Recipes, relationships. Horoscopes, health.

>Fashion, fitness. If it's about women, it's at HomeArts.com.

>http://offers./click/212/0

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...