fantastic news

From: Hannah Sullivan

Sent: Tuesday, 27 April 2010 9:11 a.m.

To: Trish Keith; Bridgette Daizell; Shaun Hoult; Wayne Peat

Cc: Richard Parker (HR); Michelle Young; Join Galloway

Subject: P Evans-McLeod - Authority Determination



Dear All,



I’m delighted to advise that the Employment Authority have found that Paul is statute barred from pursuing his personal grievance.


We may yet hear from him regarding his privacy complaint, but otherwise he is pretty much out of options
.
Have a good day.
Regards,


Hannah Sullivan


From: Bridgette DaIzell

Sent: Tuesday, 27 April 2010 9:13 am.

To: Hannah Sullivan; Trish Keith; Shaun Hoult; Wayne Peat
Cc: Richard Parker (HR); Michelle Young; lain Galloway
Subject: RE: P Evans-McLeOd - Authority Determination

That is fantastic news, thanks Hannah...

From: Bridgette DaIzell
Sent: Tuesday, 27 April 2010 9:13 am.
To: Hannah Sullivan; Trish Keith; Shaun Hoult; Wayne Peat
Cc: Richard Parker (HR); Michelle Young; lain Galloway

Upon receipt of the Authorities Determintion 26 April by Vicki Campbell,. consul and their instructions agents and participants would have all read the document rather gleefully if we are judge by the above statements


i respectfully suggest they revisit the document in parg 25 it states

vicki "could find no evidence that Mr. Evans-Mcleod resignation resulted from any inappropriate and unlaw action on telecoms part or by anybody esle"



i now hold evidence to completely refute the view held by Ms Campbell fully acknowledging that it was presented in abensce of the full facts of the matter


"We may yet hear from him regarding his privacy complaint, but otherwise he is pretty much out of options"

yes most assuredly you will  pretty much out of options  no

did you get the office junior to copy off all documents it would appear so

i bet  you don.t have a copy of what was sent do you  oh bugger !!!!!!!!!!!

you enjoy the  break   the new year will find you



pretty much out of options" or perhaps a job 

oh by the way im delighted too aren't you




.

it looks like i now have the information

Have just received confirmation from one of the government departments i have been dealing with, that the final puzzle piece i need has been found and i would appear that i have certain participants in breach of the law




So I’m going to have a great Christmas unfortunately the New year will bring shame ridicule major fines and many hard questions asked of some .watch people blame others to save their jobs

will re open my dealing with the ERA IN THE NEW YEAR not a time to rush things
plus the information gathered leads to more avenues to address as adivised by my consul
things in law that i hadnt up to this piont considered

all particpants will be called into a meeting by john rooney teleocms lawyer and the shit will hit the fan when the truth is fianlly revealed

Will keep you posted

its complicated

Telecom conundrum is complicated




They in reality have three options



A tell the truth ,



B lie



C fudge the answer with a  legal phrase something like “Telecom has said to the extent which these documents exist ’blah blah which in reality means you got me but be fucked if I’m going to admit it



All three will lead to my redemption



The third has a penalty, it may well lead telecoms participants to jail because my only remedy will be to pursue the matter to the courts and let them perjure themselves

They will not only lose their jobs but also their freedom they haven’t worked out the question yet we will let it slowly unfold as always in the goodness of time the results will be published I have kept a lot back as the timing is not right



I feel a bit like wiki leaks except I haven’t got half a million pages but I firmly believe I have sufficient

telecom has got itself a conundrum

Conundrum is a logical postulation that evades resolution, an intricate and difficult problem


the solution will show everybody the true character of the company and some individuals with in it
you will be either enlightened or disgusted as the pieces finally fall into place and dishonesty and duplicity is revealed
 
who will be the sacrifical lamb or will they cull the flock all questions will be answered in the fullness of time

I make no personal claim to the truth, only the right to seek it

I make no personal claim to the truth, only the right to seek it, prove it in argument, and to be wrong many times in order to reach it."

have spent the afternoon talking to both police and lawyers regarding the possibilites of laying criminal or civil charges against my former mangermnet team 

both are intrigued by my approach just need co-relate some more information .possibl;iy get some affadits signed and decide which would be the most advantageous avenue to approach the problem with

cant at this stage say a lot more except to say that it is lossely based around unthruths.deception and some documents that on close inspection are false 

yes i,m micromanging them the law requires they get it 100% right they didnt 

have paid overnight my costs to telecom. wonder if the will send me a reciept  so that bit of fun is finished with not overly worried as will regain money spent thru another avenue
must say im disappionted that they havent worked out what is the real intent behind all my actions i honestly thought they may have had an inkling by now oh well

Current Telecom participants




Bridgette Dalzell :current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident



Michelle Young :call centre manager Hamilton call centre, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents



Shaun Hoult: team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton



Iain Galloway HR representative for in Hamilton



Hannah Sullivan HR representative head office

some people would do well to remember it

"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

have recieved reponse from privacy commsioner

oh dear they keep digging themselves a hole they have compounded thier case yet again

note from letter

— Telecom has advised that as far as it was aware details of  *********  were contained in emails which were included in the documents which were provided to you.


well i suspect telecom is represented in this case by thier instruction agent iain galloway  iain is not doing his job properly or not asking the right questons of the right people and those people are not maybe  being completely honest with iain i have asked for specfic documents they have yet to be produced  can you guess why


below is my partial response

THEY NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE  AS BOTH SHAUN HOULT  AND HIS MANAGER MICHELLE YOUNG WHERE COMPLICT IN THIS ACTION THEY ARE NOT ONLY LYING TO ME THEY ARE LYING TO YOU AND THE OFFICE OF THE  PRIVACY COMMSIONER THAT IS SIMPLY NOT ON AND SHOULD NOT AND CANNOT BE TOLERATED AS IT DIMINISES BOTH THE PROCESS AND THE AUTHORITY

am i concerned about printing thier names am i worried about a defamation case am i worried about them threaten me NO
because this idiots have lied to me and then they signed the lie off by saying that yes these are a true and correct record of what took place wankers

if you check back in my notes you will see the tried to get me for defamation of Bridgit Dalzell  until i wrote back alerting them to a couple of facts in writing and said see you in court perhaps it was the comment made in the same letter that lying in court is perjury and comes with a jail sentence that made them back off

note to shaun and michelle dont employ intelligent people and then treat them like idiots
and shunt them out after 39,1/4  years of service and blacken thier name and blacklist them  tends to piss them off

 another note you idiots you failed to appreciate the drive that drove me to achieve top salesperson three years in a row would still exist in me but now im applying it to right a serious wrong nope not giving up 

instructing the privacy commsioner to present the evidence direct to the board as i strongly suspect that the information flow is being managed by HR 
then they will have 10 days to respond before i publish it


 THESE PEOPLES ACTIONS HAVE BROUGHT THE COMPANY INTO DISREPUTE THEIR ARSES WILL BE OUT THE DOOR BEFORE THIER FEET HIT THE GROUND


told you it would unfold over the summer then i will present it to the next group the human rights commssion or perhaps the privacy commision will be so incensed they are being played for fools they may do it them selves that would be lovely as it would be at any cost to me


oh they are not worried about it  at all thought perhaps they could provide an answer as to why my stats for the site rockerted up to the sky at precisely 3 pm to day
me thinks they got a letter as well

  

honesty intregrity morals and ethics

I have been re-reading the information garnered from telecom under the privacy act it came as no surprise to find that I had been betrayed from within my own team all the way up to senior management as people rushed to curry favour with management their loyalty is so fickle

Please don’t lie to me, unless you’re absolutely sure I’ll never find out the truth.



Disappointed no surprised no

Why no well

As you travel thru life people will let you down .betray you, not turn out to be what you think they not your true friend so why didn’t you see it coming, well sometimes you will and I did

Everybody you meet puts on a false front, they portray themselves as they think the world wants to see them as or in a way that conforms what they think of themselves

However what a person needs to be a aware of is small subtleties in their behaviour that tell what they are actually like inside, the more you listen to these little subtleties, the more you will be able to look into people souls, the more you practice this the more you will see

Sometimes these moments really blossom when they are voiced in absolute secret in a medium where people believe that their betrayal will never see the light of day the privacy act illuminates all

The hr person who did the vetting and censoring covered his own arse to the determent of yours people, all the way up national management level ,pretty selfish act really your think give him your thanks and my  regards you will find him wandering around the fifth floor .Never ever trust an hr person they are bad karma in your life

I’m going to focus on some of the lies, they are like loose threads on an otherwise undamaged canvass pull on the right one and the whole picture unravels and falls to pieces

I’m going to show the system and people up. For what it is

Nothing will be done even though the evidence is in black and white it will just show the lack of integrity of the participants and the farce the whole system is

I’m going to require HR TO ACT and nothing will be done

However their lack of fortitude in failing to do the right thing by telecoms own code of ethics and standards will be published on my blog

In a work place were the elastic in the knickers of some of the ccm.s seems to break with monotonous regularity and they are caught shagging team leaders on company premises and on company time or having one night stands with new and married fathers. Thus they have the power to fuck up your work life and your marriage as well

Now you know why I didn’t socialise much with staff after work go figure

Or arrive to work drunk out of their minds on either “p” or piss and assisted home by other team leaders on the floor leaving the site with no management back up AND all is swept under the carpet

There is a lot of truth in the fact the power doesn’t develop character it displays it

The misdeamour s i was micro managed out on pale in comparison these are the people you are required to look up to and the positions you aspire to

Shall I table the names along with the evidence well maybe yes /may no i unsure of how much heart break and disbelief you as C S R, s can take i dont really want to shatter your lives and your illusions

however if these dishonest creeps want to tap dance with me fine  i will give them the spotlight and the mirrors

Telecom has a code of ethics it is supported by the board of directors and lays down the tenets all staff from the C E O are required to act under YEAH RIGHT

One of these tenets is that all staff act with honesty go ahead look it up its there so you can see  type in code of ethics in the search field of your intranet

So think carefully who you give your loyalty to, work doesn’t last for ever but your relationships with your family should because they will be there long after your work life has gone

So far we have found that some within in telecom management lack honesty and integrity some lack ethics and a couple lack morals we know this because their actions belies the reality of their words

Get your work/ life balance in order because as much as telecom will support you when the wind blows the other way they will rip that support away. She is a cruel mistress and without being a misogynist prick women and power is a extremely dangerous and volatile environment with loyalty betrayals and cliché that alter as much as their hormones do /or perhaps because of the them .thats a reality bite the ugly truth

Look beyond the immediate think what lies behind it i will show you what i mean

In one of the reports one of the participants said the privacy commissioners report what be easy to deal with

They have employed one of the best lawyers in the country from one of the best firms so they should be justified in their confidence

However another report in my possession indicate the privacy commissioner had to make more that one request for information

This indicates a number of things

One. telecom thought its power surpassed that of the privacy commissioner but it didn’t it had to cough up that must have hurt

Two .Withholding information indicates they have something to hide

The ramifications of which will play out over the summer months

Who got the privacy commissioner involved ,that’s right it was me ,so who gets to see the report ,bugger me again

Some of you maybe aware of the drama down Ann street where a man is involved in hiding lots of gold and stuff . What you will not be aware of is there is another man at the centre of the whole affair on the legal side . In fact he is the corner stone of the investigation whose crucial role is not mentioned in the papers. I call him 007 he works long hours 14-16 hours days, he plays poker to relax  i ahve known him for twenty years or more

I play at his table twice a week, share meals with him and his wife, he reveals nothing of his work life ,its highly confidential but we do share the same moral and ethical code and the same dogged determination which is why we get on so well ,the conversations that ensue are very rewarding  

THREATENED WITH JAIL 3 HOTS AND A COT

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards
Current telecom participants
Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident
Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents
Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton
Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton

Era not happy at all I am required to pay outstanding debt by end of November or go to jail
3 hots and a cot oh bugger
IN THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY AUCKLAND


AA 388A110


5311630


BETWEEN TELECOM NEW ZEALAND


LIMITED


Applicant

AND PAUL EVANS-MCLEOD


Respondent






Member of Authority: Vicki Campbell



Investigation: On the Papers






Submissions received: 27 and 30 September 2010 from Respondent



Determination: 22 October 2010


DETERMINATION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] On 26 August 2010 I issued a determination’ the result of which was to send the parties to mediation to resolve the issue as to how and when the Authority’s decision as to costs would be met by the respondent. I gave leave to the parties to return to the Authority in the event that mediation was unsuccessful.

YES THAT’S CORRECT ON BOTH COUNTS



[2] On 22 September Telecom New Zealand Limited (“Telecom”) advised the Authority that mediation had not been successful and requested the Authority to finalise the compliance order as to payment of costs2. Mr Evans-McLeod was invited to make submissions on the issue. I have found Mr Evans-McLeod’s comments to be unhelpful in assisting the Authority to resolve the matter of the compliance with the Authority’s determination.




THAT WAS ONLY IN THEIR VIEW IN MY VIEW IT WAS EMINENTLY SUCCESSFUL WHICH IS WHY  MY COMMENTS WHERE UNHELPFUL

[3] Telecom was awarded costs in the sum of $1500 plus disbursements of $401.48. The full payment of the costs award has not been paid by Mr


McLeod who has, instead, been paying Telecom incremental amounts each week up to $10.00 per week.

INCORRECT I HAVE BEEN PAYING $28.84 A WEEK FOR THE LAST EIGHT WEEKS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF SLOPPY INFORMATION PASSED ON BY TELECOM INSTRUCTION PERSON I KEEP CATCHING THIS PERSON OUT SO NO SUPRISES THERE



[4] 1 repeat here the comments I made in my previous determination which is that parties who take claims to the Authority or the Court do so with the risk that if they are not successful there may be financial consequences in that the unsuccessful party may have to contribute to the costs of the successful party.

YES THAT IS CORRECT I ACCEPTED THAT HOWEVER THERE WAS NO MENTION OF THE “QUANTUM AND TIMING OF THE PAYMENT REFER EARLIER POSTS





[5] Mr Evans-McLeod says the Authority has no jurisdiction in this matter as he has now entered into a contract with Telecom which has been accepted through performance, to pay by way of incremental payments. That submission flies in the face of the facts which show that Telecom have continually sought payment of the costs amount in full.

AGAIN THE AUTHORITY GAVE NO INDICATION OF QUANTUM AND TIMING OF PAYMENTS SO AT THAT PIONT IT ALLOWED ME TO SCHEUDLE MY OWN PAYMENTS WHICH TELECOM TOOK EXCEPTION TO OH DEAR

DISAGREE  MY STANCE HAS TO DO WITH A CONCEPT IN CONTRACT LAW CALLED ACCORD AND SATISFACTION NOTE THEY HAVENT LISTED ANY PRECEDENTS IN LAW TO SUPPORT THIER ARGUEMENT

YES TELECOM HAS ALWAYS WANTED PAYMENT IN FULL BUT THEY FORCED ME OUT THEN BLACKLISTED ME WHICH LEFT ME ON THE DOLE  SO WHERE WAS THE MONEY COMING FROM

SHOWS YOU HOW VINDICTIVE AND PEDANTIC AND NASTY THEY ARE
THIS BULLSHIT HAS COST THEM $50.000.00 SO FAR ME $2100 THEY ARE PISSED OFF I AM REPRESENTING MYSELF AND I KEEP FINDING THEM WANTING IN TERMS OF HONESTY AND INTEGRITY


THE ERA IS SWAMPED AS EMPLOYERS ARE BEING HELD TO ACCOUNT MORE AND MORE OFTEN BY EMPLOYEE THERE IS NOW A SIX MONTH WAIT



[6] In coming to my conclusions in this matter I have taken into account the fact that continuing defiance of the Authority’s orders places Mr Evans-McLeod at peril of serious consequences. The Authority’s orders may be the subject of a further application for compliance in the Employment Court which is empowered to impose penalties for continuing non-compliance which include imprisonment, fines and the sequestration of property.

ALL MY PROPERTY AND CHATTELS HAVE BEEN SOLD QUITE SOME TIME AGO SO GOOD LUCK WITH THAT  ME THINKS






I order Mr Evans-McLeod to comply with the Authority’s Determination numbered AA 187A/1O dated 1 June 2010, and to do so by 26 November 2010.





Costs



[7] Costs relating to this application shall lie where they fall.



MEANS NOBODY HAS TO PAY COSTS


telecom and its instruction agent havent a clue what im doing and why. i let them keep wondering so where to now
well still have to wait for the privacy commissioner and human rights commissioners  report then i hold them accountable again THIS BIT WILL COST PEOPLE THIER JOBS AND TELECOM THIER IMAGE AND A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY IF IT COMES OUT ON MY SIDE  COST TO ME ZERO

GET THE IDEA I DONT QUIT AND NOW I HAVE A FEATURE WRITER OF A NATIONAL DAILY ON BOARD

FUCK EM THEY DESERVE WHATS COMING THEY BROUGHT IT ON THEMSELVES WITH THIER DISHONEST BEHAVIOUR

after the employment court there is always the civil court

some people are in a load of shit only they dont know it yet while the year since my "resignation" aug 20th 2009  as been not without its moments
this second year may well see me rise from the ashes   you just have to love the law 
people seem to think HR has the gospel and the last word but alas many managers dont know the law
privacy commersioner and human rights commisioner reports will give added wieght to my apllication HR appear to b...e seriously remiss with their advice


good chance i may become a landlord soon as well  can you guess how

cause its not the begining of the end  its just the end of the beginning
bugger im going to have to file another load of paperwork  i might as well go for a law degree get a student loan at 58 what a hoot


DEFAMATION



Defamation is an injury to the reputation or character of someone resulting from the false statements or actions of another. Defamation is a false attack on your good name. Your good name is regarded as a proprietary interest, not a personal interest. Defamation is an improper and unlawful attack against your proprietary right to your good name, your reputation.



Defamation is a general term for the false attack on your character or reputation through either libel or slander. Libel is a term describing visual defamation, usually in the form of lies in print, oh bugger  or misleading or deceptive photographs.




Libel exposes or subjects you to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or disgrace, or causes you to be shunned or avoided, or injures you in your occupation.



Slander is a term describing defamation that you hear, not see, usually in the form of someone talking trash about you or spreading or repeating lies and unfounded rumor.



Slander is an oral statement that tends to injur you in respect to your office, profession, trade or business. The statement or statements generally suggest that you lack integrity, honesty, incompetence, or that you possess other reprehensible personal characteristics.



Defamation is an important concept to know for anyone working

. Why? Because you may be an at-will employee subject to being terminated at any time for no reason, but if your employer, or his or her representative defames you, you will be entitled to sue for that attack on your reputation or character, even though you have no contractual right to your job and you would not be able to sue for wrongful termination based on a contractual theory. Furthermore, if the false attack on your character or reputation causes you to be terminated as a result you can sue for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, which will entitle you to seek damages far greater than the usual wrongful termination case based on contract. This means that if you were terminated as a result of the defamatory statement, you then will have the right to sue for wrongful termination in violation of public policy even though you were an at-will employee and you could have otherwise been terminated for no reason at any time.



A legal claim based on defamation entitles the victim to recover against the defamer for his or her emotional damages. In addition, the victim will be entitled to sue for punitive, or punishment, damages.




There are other critical differences which make defamation important to be aware of. You can prove defamation on your word alone, even though it is always better to have some confirming evidence. ( a letter, a memo, an e-mail, statements from fellow employees confirming the defamatory remarks about you, etc.) You can testify in court as to statements made by others about you. This means that the "hearsay" rule does not apply to the testimony in court which repeats defamatory statements.made out of court.



You do not have to prove damages in defamation cases. Damages are presumed. This means that you do not have to testify that you were emotionally destroyed or had to see a psychiatrist or other mental health specialist or doctor.



The defamatory comments do not have to be stated (this is described as being "published") to someone outside the company. Purely internal memorandums or comments that falsely attack you can be defamatory. If another employee heard or read the comment then the defamatory statement has been "published" sufficiently to support a charge of defamation.




Each repetition of a defamatory remark is a new injury. This means that you can obtain damages for each time the defamatory statement is repeated.

dam you gotta love the law and the privacy act




You may even be entitled to receive damages every time you repeat the defamatory comment to someone else! Yes, if it was reasonably foreseeable that you would feel compeled to repeat or explain the defamatory comment, your employer may be liable each time you repeated his comment!







For example, suppose your employer charges you with stealing or lack of loyalty to the company and you are terminated as a result of those false accusations. Suddenly you find yourself unemployed and looking for a new job. You feel compelled at interviews to explain why you can't offer a good referral from your prior employer.



"He said I stole from him, or he alleged that I wasn't loyal to the company."



Under these circumstances your repeated explanation of the defamatory comments may itself be defamation that you are entitled to be compensated for!


Probably the most important situation involving qualified privileges are those where your work is being evaluated in performance reviews or other evaluations of your conduct in the workplace.



Can your employer defame you in a performance review without being liable to you for defamation? Maybe. Maybe not. An employer loses his or her qualified privilege to make defamatory comments in critiquing you or your work when the defamatory statement is made,



Without a good faith belief in the truth of the statement; or
they admitted micro management twice and failed to treat me in good faith during the disciplainary process   TICK

Without reasonable grounds for believing the truth of the statement; or
they where fully aware that the micromanagment of me was different to the way they managed other staff   TICK


With a motive or willingness to vex, harass, annoy, or unjure you; or
they knew it was winding me up as i got so angry they sent me home rather than let me go back on queue TICK

Is exaggerated or not fully or fairly stated; or
micro managing is work place bullying TICK


The result of a reckless investigation; or
reckless  they lied from the start i will give you an example in some future posts TICK

they told so many lies they couldnt keep track of them then compounded them by putting them in the minutes of the disciplinary meetings as a true and correct record

 DOUBLE TICK



Motivated by hatred or ill will towards you.


it is my firm belief that michelle young did not like me challenging her when she attempted to chastise me for misdeameanors admitted to ,and resolved to my managers satisfaction and i politely refused tobe told off a second time for the same error



michelle and i have a appiontment in court in the coming months or years however long it takes except they will be a paradim shift in the balance of power






Examples of statements that have been determined by the courts to be defamatory are those that involve; allegations of embezzlement, lying, irresponsibility, lack of integrity, dishonesty, laziness, incompetence, not being eligible for rehire, insubordination, being a traitor to the company, or having committed a criminal act.

they not me lied and showed a lack of integrity

As you can see, there are numerous situations where the employer risks losing his or her qualified privilege and if the privilege is lost, any publication of the false comment becomes defamatory and you will be entitled to damages for the injury to your reputation.




Other factors that may be considered in making a finding of defamation are whether the person making the statement knows or believes the statement to be true; whether the statement is the result of anger, jealousy, resentment, grudges, quarrels, ill-will or other conflict between you and the person making the statement.

oh fucking dear are they in it up to thier fucking necks

In order to be defamatory the statement must be, of course, false. The employer has the burden of proving that the statement is not false In other words, the employer has to prove that the statement was true. The statement must also seem to state a fact, or that it is based on fact, rather than an opinion, or based only on opinion.

well fuck me that won,t be hard now will it  they micromanage me out they admitt to it at the same time they are having a two day boot camp because the sites performance is well under par  i think i will supeana all that attended yes that would be best



A statement made as a statement of opinion, rather than as an allegation of fact, is not defamatory.



Are statements made about you by a supervisor that are placed in your personnel file possibly libelous? If the statements are statements of opinion, rather than false statements of fact, they are not potentially libelous. The question to ask is, does the statement of opinion suggest that it is base on fact or is provable as a fact? Statements that may support a claim of libel are; false accusations of criminal conduct, lackof integrity, dishonesty, incompetence, or reprehensible personal moral behavior. For example, if you found in your personnel file, a false statement accusing you of suspected theft, such a statement would be libelous. Such a statement would imply to the average reader that it is confirmable as a fact, and is not just an unfounded personal opinion.



Be aware that a defamatory statement in your personnel file defames for as long as the statement exists in your file. What does this mean? This means that defamatory statements made 5, 10, or even 15 years ago, and placed in your personnel file may be subject to a lawsuit if they are still there in your file "attacking" your reputation or your good name up to the present time. The statute do not protect the employer on "old" statements that are still around to be seen or heard.



If you are an employee or supervisor-employee and you are accused of engaging in sexual harassment or some other offensive activity and the fact of the accusation is "published," your employer may be liable to you for defamation. If the employer notified other employees or other parties of the allegations against you , such conduct by the employer may be defamatory against you.




As we mentioned earlier, an interesting situation that sometimes occurs is when the publication of the slanderous information is made by the employee being slandered, rather than by the employer. This is described as "self publication." For example, suppose your boss brings you into his or her office and informs you that you are no longer needed because he suspects that you are a drinker and he states that he does not regard you as competent in your work.. Suppose further that your employer makes these comments only to your direct manager, and repeats these comments to no one outside the company. Suppose after your boss informs you of these "facts," you feel compelled to tell your fellow employees what has happened to you. After all, everyone wants to know. Under these circumstances the employee himself publishes the defamatory statements.



Is your employer liable for slander when you have repeated and published the statements? Your employer will be liable where he or she knew or should have known that someone facing circumstances similar to yours would have been compelled to "self-publish" the defamatory statements, and the court asks is, was there nothing done  to prevent it.

they fucked up big time with that one

 The question self-publication foreseeable under the circumstances? If so, the employer may be liable. The difficulty with "self-publication" defamation for the employee is that the employee has the burden of proving that he or she was psychologically compelled to repeat or publish the defamatory statements.
well they did send me to a counsellor  how convient




What if you leave your old job for a new one and find out that your ex-employer has been saying bad things about you? Bad-mouthing an employee, or a former employee is known as "blacklisting" and is potentially illegal  as a form of defamation just described..

pretty much the same as putting do not re-employ on my file you think



if you read my previous blogs you may find that some have dug a big hole for themselves

i m off to my pro-bono lawyer friends for a chat

don't regret my past I just regret the time I've wasted with the wrong people!

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards
Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney


John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson














don't regret my past I just regret the time I've wasted with the wrong people!  AMEN TO THAT

just patiently waitng for the privacy commissioner report as is my media contact 

me i think it is personal

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards







Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney


John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson
















From: John Rooney [mailto:John.Rooney@simpsongrierson.com]
Sent: Thursday, 30 September 2010 12:25 p.m.
To: 'Stephen Berry'
Cc: 'Paul Mcleod'
Subject: RE: 5311630 Telecom New Zealand Ltd v Paul Evans-McLeod [SGDMS.FID361431]

Stephen,

The respondent has no issues with the attachment as far as confidentiality is concerned. It does, though, take issue with the claim that there is a "legal binding contract as to debt repayment" and that Mediation was successful. As previously advised, the respondent wishes to proceed with its application for compliance.

my reply

Stephen

There is no issue around at all around the claim that there is a “ legal binding contract as to debt repayment “ or that the mediation was unsuccessful .the issues only exists in the mind of Telecoms instruction agent

The applicant may wish to proceed with its application for compliance, however as stated in previous correspondence I am complying with the ruling of the Authority .this is just legal bullying it is both vexatious and unnecessary .I do not wish to proceed the matter has be resolved to my satisfaction .and in my belief to the Authority’s satisfaction

It has the feel that it is driven by a perhaps a personal agenda of Telecoms instruction agent as I have caught all Telecom participants wanting in matters of trust and honesty and the agent has taken umbrage that I have the audacity to confront him about it,

Therefore I ask John Rooney to bypass the instruction agent and correspond directly with Wayne Peat the Head of Telecom HR ( I am complying with Telecoms request to pass all correspond via their consul so could Wayne Peat correspond directly to me to indicate contact has been made ) and request a change in the instruction agent to someone who can conduct our business free from the impairment of personal agendas

Warm regards

Paul


me i think they just sore losers they going to be really pissed soon

The evil that men

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards







Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney


John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson






















The evil that men do lives after them." ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"
via the internet oh bugger

to thier children and thier childrens children one day thier curiosity will lead them to the truth
that thier mummy and daddy have a dark side they want to keep hidden
...That their worldly goods where achieved by dishonest conduct and moral ineptitude

independant legal advice sort

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards




Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney

John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson

















Telecom participants in my fight are seeking independent legal advice the united front is starting to crumble, people are realising HR after watching what they did to me. are going to hang them out to dry as will thier direct reports
They realise now they are on a slippery slope and are preparing for the shit storm,watch for the Nuremberg defence

telecom goes back to a bullyling approach

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards




Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney


John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson

















all ways happens when they lose, thier instruction person must be the laughing stock in the office, never mind i think its time the participants brushed up thier CV,s
another chapter for my book

  Dear Stephen,




Mediation was unsuccessful. The applicant therefore wishes to proceed with its application for an order that Mr Evans-McLeod pay the costs award in full. It is happy for this to be done on the papers.






Regards


john rooney
 
To Paul Evans-McLeod

I refer to the email below from John Rooney, which Mr Rooney sent to you on 22 September 10.

The Authority has been advised that mediation was unsuccessful. Please confirm that is your understanding of the situation.

John Rooney wishes to proceed with the application for an order and is happy for this to be done on the papers.

Please advise whether or not you are agreeable with the application being done on the papers.

Your response should be received by the Authority no later than Wednesday 6 October 10.



Stephen Berry

Support Officer

Employment Relations Authority
Te Ratonga Ahumana Taimahi

my reply
 



5311630 Telecom New Zealand Ltd v Paul Evans-McLeod 270910 mk2




The banking and clearance of the initial deposit and subsequent instalments is evidence that Telecom accepted the offer of settlement in the terms agreed upon as to “quantum and timing “

The terms of the ruling of the employment relations authority issued by Vicki Campbell have been fulfilled and adhered to

If a creditor accepts, endorses, and receives payment from a debtor he has accepted the contract “

Thus we have a contract, a legal binding contract as to debt repayment between my self and Telecom

Mediation was successful. The respondent therefore does not wish to proceed



As it his belief that the authority does not have the jurisdiction relevant to the specifics of this contract

I mean no disrespect to the authority, I am but a simple layman but I don’t understand where or how the authority can overrule or order me to pay in full if it chooses to .

Surely this disagreement in relation to the payment of costs, to my way of thinking, is now under contract law not employment law

As stated Telecom by it own actions have made it so, have they chosen the right venue to reconcile their grievance in this specific matter, I am unsure and seek clarification

Telecom is attempting to bully me into submission by any legal means possible and this is merely a continuation of their vexatious and mean-spirited approach .Telecom is fearful that the current submissions before the privacy commissioner will find their actions less than meritorious. And is trying effect an speedy resolution to its current concerns with me to enable themselves to close them down and refuse to deal with it .This has happened twice before when both their submissions and arguments have been found wanting

However if it does move forward and the ruling is in my favour I seek costs relevant to this application



Kind regards

Paul Evans-McLeod

had the best day to date

This blog has been in play for some months. To gain the full story, go to left hand side "blog archive" go to bottom post of January with same title as this Blog and read upwards







Current telecom participants


Bridgette Dalzell current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident


Michelle Young call center manager Hamilton call center, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents


Shaun Hoult team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton


Iain Galloway HR representative spends a lot of time in Hamilton


Hannah Sullivan HR Telecom instruction person to lawyer John Rooney


John Rooney Telecoms legal representative partner in Simpson Grierson


















I have just had the best day out, for a long time i have just spent two hours with two lawyers who gave me their time for free pro bono


I outlined, my case ,my progress and the all other relevant points up to today

They advised i was to commended for my excellent submissions (bugger now i have a swelled head )

Then they were so impressed with my notes and presentation that they took them to another lawyer for discussion and then came back to me after an hour

With some recommendations to be considered



They asked me to sign a release for the documents i presented and these are going to be forwarded on to an employment expert who is extremely well versed in employment law she has served as a clerk to an employment court judge as well as served on the EMA employment and manufacturers associations so know the deal from both sides of the equation

so my feeling is just great,  im on the right track and so some fucking wankers and liars are going to get thier comeuppence big time
 i hope telecom abandons them and they have to pay all costs themselves

my resolve to see this to its conclusion is still strong i will do it  via legal aid as i have sold my house to my brother and chattels to another friend  so i,m penniless and on the dole oh bugger  

i feel like dave henderson who took on the ird and won
yes someone has been across my blogg and there is mention of a book in the offering isnt it just amazing what life turns up

advance

Advance, and never halt, for advancing is perfection. Advance and do not fear the thorns in the path, for they draw only corrupt blood." ~ Kahlil Gibran

over the next few weeks i will be highlighting some of the dispapionting traits our leadersahip dispalys all will be supported by documents so it cannot be denied

Got a mention in dispatches to the board

teIecom


To: The Board of Directors



From:



Date: 08 June 2010



Subject: Disgruntled former employee - Paul Evans-McLeod


No an employee who doesn’t like people that act without honesty or integrity


The purpose of this memorandum is to advise you of a communication addressed to you from the above individual, which you may be unaware of. Mr Evans-McLeod has posted the attached letter to you on his publicly accessible blog site http://blogspot.com/.

Yes completely correct the board is fully supportive of the telecoms code of ethics indeed they authorized them see previous post I was endevouring to alert them to some perhaps unsavory events



You may not have received this letter, as we have blocked emails from Mr Evans-McLeod’s email address to almost all Telecom addresses, due to multiple concerns with his communications. We wish to bring this particular communication to your attention given his threat to go public and involve the media.

Absolutely I will awaiting for events to unfold refer latest blogs there exists a very strong possibility they may have lied to the privacy commission



The relevant background to this matter is as follows:





• Mr Evans-McLeod was employed by Telecom for 39 years, and 3months most recently as a Customer Services Representative in its Hamilton Call Centre.



• Mr Evans-McLeod was subject to performance management from November 2008 until the time of termination of his employment in August 2009, by which time he had received one formal written warning and attended a second disciplinary meeting in relation to his performance.

Read my previous blogs they micromanaged me they are now denying the micromanagement unfortunately I have diary notes and witnesses’ and the wankers admitted it twice

They have also refused to release to me the disciplinary procedures what happened to the first verbal warning second verbal warning third verbal warning ,first written warning second written warning duh



• Mr Evans-McLeod was represented in both performance discussions and the two disciplinary meetings by a representative of the EPMU.

Correct



• Through his union representative Mr Evans-McLeod raised a personal grievance and requested that Telecom attend voluntary mediation.

After I informed them they where possibility in breach of the 2002 health and safety amendment act and personally libel for a $500.000.000 fine and three years imprisonment they shat themselves and issued a final written warning to exit me quick smart a personal grievance was my only recourse left

• Following mediation on 17 August, which was facilitated by the Department of Labour, the parties signed a settlement agreement on 21 August (countersigned by a mediator from the Department of Labour on 24 August) and Mr Evans-McLeod’s resigned from his employment effective 21 August 2009.

The mediation was confidential but I became aware at a much later stage that they had blacklisted me within 15 days of my “resignation” read previous blogs unfortunately telecom failed the “good faith” component required under my contract idiots





• In December 2009, Mr Evans-McLeod sought to enter into correspondence with Paul Reynolds regarding the subject matter of the mediation and events surrounding the mediation. , replied on Paul’s behalf and pointed out thatthe mediated settlement agreement was in full and final settlement of all matters relating to Mr Evans-McLeod’s employment and it was not permissible to seek to re¬litigate matters.





• Subsequently, in February 2010, Mr Evans-McLeod sought to raise a personal grievance claim in the Employment Relations Authority. Telecom successfully argued that Mr Evans-McLeod’s claim was statute barred and obtained costs against Mr Evans-McLeod.

Read posts re repayment costs etc



• Mr Evans-McLeod has previously contacted the media, resulting in a brief article in the Dominion Post and has also written to the Prime Minister’s Office, the Minister of Labour and the Ombudsman.



Correct and a lot of others as well although telecom has yet to recognize the intent of these actions



• He has now raised a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner that Telecom has breached certain principles of the Privacy Act. We are confident this complaint will not be upheld.

Well we shall see but if they are so confident why did they withhold documents necessitating a second request for them plus as per above they may not have been completely honest with the privacy commissioner silly people





• Mr Evans-McLeod has not been represented by the EPMU since August 2009 and is acting as a litigant in person.

Correct cause its much cheaper then lawyers and it’s been a great learning experience their consul mr john Rooney puts me straight if I inadvertently overstep the mark I bear him no animosity what so ever he is just telecoms agent in this matter and under instruction from telecom







Since becoming aware of Mr Evans-McLeod’s letter to you, we have again requested that he not contact any Telecom officer or employee directly regarding the issues he has with Telecom and that all such correspondence be directed to our solicitors Simpson Grierson. We do not consider that a response from you is necessary, but wanted to give you an informed choice in the matter, as Mr Evans-McLeod is both determined and persistent in his attempts to find a forum to discuss his grievances. If you would like further

background information please contact . •and I



,‘ in the Media Relations team are also familiar with this matter should you wish to consult about a response.

Page 2 of 2 Memo to Board PE-M (final)





Will it be the final memo to the board no once i have the substantive evidence i require this letter will be returned to the board a full explanation of what really went on supported by affidavits witness statements etc etc



IT IS EASY TO WORK OUT THE WRITER OF THIS MEMO AS THE USUAL TRAITS OF LAZINESS AND NOT QUITE TELLING THE FULL STORY ARE APPARENT WITHIN
SHOWS YOU HOW SPINELESS THE HR PEOPLE ARE HAPPY TO BAG YOU TO ALL BUT LACK THE GUTS TO LEAVE THIER NAME ON PAPER 
NEVER MIND THE BOARD WILL KNOW THIER NAMES WHEN THE THEY ARE THE LEAD STORY IN THE MEDIA




am i worried about going to court no not one bit in fact i cant wait as it will provide a forum to trap them once again telling lies only this time it will be called perjury and that carries a punishment called jail 
wots jail 3 hots and a cot i can cathc up on my reading



Being challenged in life is inevitable, being defeated is optional



I shall not fear anyone on earth.






I shall fear only God.






I shall not bear ill toward anyone.






I shall not submit to injustice from anyone.






I shall conquer untruth by truth.






And in resisting untruth I shall put up with all suffering.






Mahatma Gandhi

ethics

Telecom has a code of ethics unfortunately in my case ,the words on paper were clearly disconnected from the reality of the experience, nobody was interested in honesty and integrity just wasn’t a concept they were familiar with at all really , all had their own agenda, for their own selfish ends




You tell one lie you have to tell a thousand more to cover it all up





In the coming weeks as things slowly unfold you will find that four or five people will become very aware that there is no such thing as a minor breach of ethics you are either honest or your are not



They are now in the system, they cannot un ring the bell, the legal process now in play will find them wanting caught up in their own web of lies expressed in their own words

tell it like it is

have just changed my label detailing the automatic deduction to telecom for payment of costs that appears on thier account to 30 pieces of silver CAUSE THOSE FUCKERS BETRAYED ME a little reminder for the next 50 weeks ON A WEEKLY BASIS 

LIKE JUDAS  THEY GOT  EXPOSED FOR WHAT THEY REALLY  ARE 

the tide has turned

It has been an interesting couple of days but at last the stress as gone i have just had it confirmed by a very reliable source that they have breached the law


These four people had their heads so far up their own arses that they made some bad mistakes they have been getting away with it for so long they believed their position of power would protected them and a forced mediation would be the end of it



They thought no one would challenge them, that they knew the rules and the law better than anybody else wrong wrong wrong wrong



As soon as i saw that i was being micro managed i knew they were targeting me so after i stormed off the site i calmed down an thought it thru



Realised my job was gone Realised someone was conducting a personal vendetta against me , Realised what i was up against, and laid trap after trap





I warned them three times back off don’t do this don’t take me for a fool because I’m not all the while stepping them thru my carefully laid plan



YOU SHOULD HAVE WORKED IT OUT RIGHT AT THE START WITH THE NAME OF MY BLOG



THE CLUE WAS STARING YOU IN THE FACE YOU WERE TO ARROGANT TO SPOT IT



BECAUSE THAT ALL I HAVE DONE IS


HOISTED YOU WITH YOUR OWN  PETARD



YOU DID IT TO YOURSELVES







Well three of you are well fucked now and I’m working on the fourth



power doesn’t develop character it displays it

Your jobs are gone it is quite simply all a matter of time best you resign now


 telecom is going to drop you like hot coals  your acts of dishonesty  and lack of integrity are going to follow you all the days of your lives 



Warren Buffet said “ you find out who’s swimming naked when the tide goes out” well you fuckers the tide is on the turn   IT NOT GOING TO BE A PRETTY SIGHT



You have no one to blame but yourselves and your lack of honesty and integrity your own moral compass put you on the wrong path and now you are on the rocks



Am i gloating  you betcha



Don’t fuck with old people that have time on their hands especially me

Request for postponement aproved

The Authority Member, Ken Anderson has asked me to relay the following message in reply to the applicant's request for a postponement of today's conference call.




"The Authority is in receipt of a letter from Mr Evans-McLeod attached to an email dated 12th September 2010. Additionally, there is a letter from the office of the Privacy Commissioner dated 3rd September 2010. Having perused this correspondence, it seems appropriate that the conference call set down for 2:00p.m. today is postponed, and the investigation of the Authority is suspended.

While at this stage in the proceedings, the Authority is unaware of the relevance of the information that Mr Evans-McLeod is seeking from Telecom (via the office of the Privacy Commissioner), the preliminary view of the Authority is that Mr Evans-McLeod may have some difficulty in regard to surmounting the jurisdictional barrier that currently appears to exist. Perhaps he may wish to seek professional advice about the merits of his application (and possible costs implications) before proceeding further within the Authority."

Telecom will be well aware shortly as there is a very very very high probablilty that they may have lied to the privacy commssioner heads will have to roll on that one im afraid more on that as information comes to hand

how do i know because in they acted with honour and intregrity as required by thier own code of ethics  (A) should have occurred it didnt so (B) MUST HAVE SO THEY ARE TELLING POKIES  

 have recieved notice that they have finally complied with the privacy commissioner requests it
as for

the preliminary view of the Authority is that Mr Evans-McLeod may have some difficulty in regard to surmounting the jurisdictional barrier that currently appears to exist. Perhaps he may wish to seek professional advice about the merits of his application (and possible costs implications) before proceeding further within the Authority."

thanks very much for the heads up

 have now got some  lawyers across it  helping me out pro bono  that laywer  speak  meaning its free  yippeee  one is very interested in the case, 

as disccussed with a friend to day it is surprising the people who will help if you ask in the right way  very interested in my blog ,my efforts and the unquie angle i  am approaching it with

oh yeah had a mediation meeting with telecom today do NOT  ask me any questions all confidential  not allowed to discuss it

Request for postponement

Request for postponement


To the employment relations authority

Under section 221 of the Employment Relations act 2000

I respectfully request a postponement of the conference call between the parties scheduled for 2pm Monday 13 September and an extension of time in regards to the matter before it namely File number 5315212 Paul Alan Evans-McLeod Applicant, Telecom New Zealand Respondent

To enable the authority to more effectually dispose of the matter before it according to the substantial merits and equities of the case I had the intention of providing substantive details which in part was/were dependant on the findings of the Privacy commissioner in a case before it (their reference c 122243) relevant to the current proceedings

I had every expectation of the documents being available unfortunately at the time of filing I was unaware that Telecom had requested of the Privacy Commissioner and been granted, an extension of time

Unfortunately as supported by the attached letter from the investigating officer Sarah Thompson, her office is still awaiting further information from Telecom and she is unable at this point to confirm an exact time when it may become available

The outcome may or may not have great relevance as to your determination regarding such matters as jurisdiction, matters as under section 68 regarding unfair bargaining and whether good faith obligations imposed by the act have been complied with

And whether I was induced to enter the agreement and mediation by oppressive means, undue influence or duress with regards to the fairness of the disciplinary procedures/actions used against me

Indeed the rulings of the privacy commissioner and any subsequent agency such as the human rights commissioner who may or may not become involved may possibly negate the requirement for the employment relations authority to be involved

Thus the request for an extension is lodged so all parties can make such directions as are necessary or expedient in the circumstances

my mantra

Let the first act of every morning be to make the following resolve for the day:


I shall not fear anyone on earth.

I shall fear only God.

I shall not bear ill toward anyone.

I shall not submit to injustice from anyone.

I shall conquer untruth by truth.

And in resisting untruth I shall put up with all suffering.

Mahatma Gandhi

telecoms a pedantic bully

all correspondance as per above post removed at the request of telecom

 
Dear john




Done



Warm regards



Paul



From: John Rooney [mailto:John.Rooney@simpsongrierson.com]

Sent: Tuesday, 14 September 2010 5:33 p.m.

To: 'Paul Mcleod'

Subject: Telecom - Without Prejudice Correspondence [SGDMS.FID361431]



Dear Paul,



It has come to Telecom's attention that on your blog you have posted without prejudice correspondence between yourself and Telecom. The correspondence relates to Telecom's application for a compliance order and the parties' attempts to agree on terms to resolve the payment of the costs award. This correspondence is privileged and confidential to the parties. Telecom has not and does not consent to its disclosure to any other person or to its publication. Telecom therefore requires the immediate removal of all of without prejudice correspondence from your blog. Can you please confirm this will be done.



Regards



John Rooney
Partner
Simpson Grierson

Level 27,88 Shortland Street, Private Bag 92518

Auckland, New Zealand, DX CX 10092

DDI: +64 9 977 5070
Fax: +64 9 977 5083

john.rooney@simpsongrierson.com
www.simpsongrierson.com












and as per the committment made by myself  on commencing blog  

Disclosure The writer of this blog holds no liability or responsibility for the views ,opinions, thoughts ,and statements added by any and all other participants in this blog and any others that may be added at sometime in the future I'm a mellow easy going friendly person, happy to help anybody with anything if it will make their life just a little easier, but you fuck me over, I rarely forgive and never ever forget any body that feels inpugned or tarnished or believes any statement is untrue, or unjust, is free to comment or request the withdrawal of any comments; provided they can offer proof to substandiate their arguement They can leave comments as long as any allegations listed can be supported

telecoms statement in reply to my accusations re black listing defamation etc

i get the feeling they are not happy at all 

 the lawyer is entitled to his view

it is up to the employment relations authority to decide on the out come 
UNDER THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ACT 2000






BEFORE THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY AT AUCKLAND



File No. 5315212

BETWEEN PAUL EVANS-MCLEOD

Applicant

AND TELECOM NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

Respondent

STATEMENT IN REPLY





Simpson Grierson

Barristors & Solicitors



J D RooneylS L Hogg

Telephone: +64-9-358 2222

Facsimile: +64-9-307 0331

Email: john.rooney©simpsongrierson.com

DX CX1 0092

Private Bag 92518

Auckland



To: The applicant

And to: The Employment Relations Authority







1. The respondent’s view in relation to the problem specified in the application is:





(a) The Authority has no jurisdiction to hear and consider the applicant’s claim under section 161 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) as it is not an employment relationship problem.





2. The first respondent’s account of the relevant facts is:





(a) The applicant is a former employee of the respondent. The applicant’s employment with the respondent terminated on 20 August 2009.





(b) The parties entered into a settlement agreement which was signed by a mediator on 24 August 2009 pursuant to section 149 of the Employment Relations Act 2000.





(c) The applicant subsequently sought, unsuccessfully, to pursue a personal grievance in relation to his employment with the respondent.





(d) The respondent does not accept that the Authority has jurisdiction to hear and consider the applicant’s claim which relates to events that are alleged to have occurred after the cessation of the applicant’s employment with the respondent.

"events that are alleged to have occurred after the cessation of the applicant’s employment with the respondent".


sorry bro what part of an email that says do not re-employ    dated etc  with in three weeks of  my resignation don,t we get

it happened  i have proof  they are pissed off they got the office junior to pack the box of documents and it slipped thru

 



(e) The applicant’s claim is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. Further, it is brought in the applicant’s full knowledge that he has no means to meet an award of costs against him.

fuck off it was you wankers that abused the disciplainary process you all  lied shaun bridget michelle  hannah iain  thinking you where safe in the knowledge that no one would challenge you and it would be uncovered
 which is why each time i show you lawyer where the lies are he stops persuing that avenue and changes tack  the blood is on your hands and it wont wash off  oh bugger

the many who have been following the blog have already seen a couple of  you caught out  so keep pouncing around the site knowing that your work mates think very little of  you and your actions your integrity and your honesty

you would be amazed at the commnets and the level of support i have for my blog  quite  heat warming really



(f) Without prejudice to the respondent’s position, it denies the allegations set out in the statement of problem.



3. The first respondent makes the following comments and supplies the following further information:





For the reasons set out above, the Authority does not have jurisdiction to grant remedies sought by the applicant in his statement of problem.





4. The respondent attaches copies of the following documents (which it thinks are relevant to the problem):





(a) The Authority’s determination in Evans-McLeod v Telecom New Zealand Limited (AA 187/10, V Campbell (Member), 26 April 2010).





Mediation





5. Have you, the respondent, tried to resolve this problem by using mediation services provided by the Department of Labour?

Yes/ No





6. Have you, the respondent, tried to resolve this problem by using mediation provided by someone other than the Department of Labour? Yes / No ~





7. Have you, the respondent, taken any other steps of any kind to resolve the problem? Yes No ~







Signature of Counsel for:

Telecom New Zealand Limited

Date: _______________ __________________









This statement in reply is lodged by JOHN DOMINIC ROONEY, on behalf of the abovenamed respondent, whose address for service is at the offices of Simpson Grierson, Lumley Centre, 88 Shortland Street, Auckland 1141 and whose telephone number is ÷64-9-977 5070 and whose fax number for service is +64-9-977 5083 and whose document exchange number for service is DX CX1 0092 and whose e-mail address for service is john.rooney~simpsongrierson.com.

Worst NZ corporate what a suprise

Worst NZ corporate







lTelecom is perceived as the country's worst company, according to new research.



AMR Interactive's 2010 Corporate Reputation Index measured how New Zealanders rate our 20 largest companies on products, innovation, workplace, citizenship, governance, leadership and financial performance.



Telecom's overall score was not just the worst of the New Zealand bunch, it also scored lower than the 60 companies in the Australian study.



Telecom spokesperson Mark Watts said he believed the results reflected the problems the XT Network had earlier this year. At the other end, NZ Post took out top prize.

just think at one time they both formed part of the same company new zealand post and telegraph  the old p & t

reply from era re telecom bullying tactic re costs interesting reply

IN THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY AUCKLAND


AA 388/10

5311630

BETWEEN TELECOM NEW ZEALAND

LIMITED

Applicant

AND PAUL EVANS-MCLEOD

Respondent

Member of Authority: Vicki Campbell

Investigation: On the Papers

Submissions received: 6 August 2010 from Applicant

10 August 2010 from Respondent

Determination: 26 August 2010





DETERMINATION OF THE AUTHORITY





[1] Telecom New Zealand Limited (“Telecom”) makes application for a compliance order against the respondent Mr Paul Evans-McLeod. Compliance is sought with the Authority’s Determination numbered AA 187A/10 dated 1 June 2010 (“the determination”).





[2] Telecom was awarded costs in the sum of $1500 plus disbursements of $401.48. The full payment of the costs award has not been paid by Mr Evans¬McLeod who has, instead, been paying Telecom incremental amounts each week up to $10.00 per week.





[3] Parties who take claims to the Authority or the Court do so with the risk that if they are not successful there may be financial consequences in that the unsuccessful party may have to contribute to the costs of the successful party.

yes thats fine i realised that going into it and am happy to pay



[4] Mr Evans-McLeod says he is complying with the determination albeit slowly. Mr Evans-McLeod is not currently in paid employment and is in receipt of a WINZ benefit. He has provided a copy of his weekly budget for the assistance of the Authority. I have some sympathy for Mr Evans-McLeod’s financial position, however, costs are payable in their entirety.

oh bugger where am i going to get the money from sell some stuff on trade me  may be



[5] Telecom seeks an order from the Authority that Mr Evans-McLeod materially increases his weekly instalments and that Mr Evans-McLeod be required to notify Telecom if he resumes his employment, until such time as the costs award is paid in full.

will do my best and have already agreed to in previous correspondance to notify telecom when i resume employment mind you telecom blacklisting me in the industry was not helpful to same



[6] The Authority does not have jurisdiction to make such orders with respect tounsuccessfti1-applicants. -Section 13 8(4A) provides the Authority with the discretion to make an order that payments to an employee may be made by instalments, however, this can only be done if the financial position of the employer requires it.





[7] This case is not about an employer seeking relief to make payments by instalment and the Act does not provide the Authority with the discretion to order instalments of payments for impecunious unsuccessful applicants.


impecunious  big legal word means "poor"


[8] In coming to my conclusions in this matter I have also taken into account the fact that continuing defiance of the Authority’s orders places Mr Evans-McLeod at peril of serious consequences. The Authority’s orders may be the subject of a further application for compliance in the Employment Court which is empowered to impose penalties for continuing non-compliance which include imprisonment, fines and the sequestration of property.

not sure about this one and the word defiance might be meant in a legal context cause im not defying the order just not paying alot 

jail doesnt worry me get 3 hots and a cot  long as it has a library can cath up on my reading



[9] It seems to me that Telecom is not averse to Mr Evans-McLeod paying the costs determination by instalment. Therefore the parties are ordered to attend mediation within the next 28 days to resolve the matter of the quantum and timing of any incremental payments to be made.

means john rooney the lawyer  can clip the ticket to charge telecom and have a nice drive to hamilton cause im not going anywhere cant afford it and talking about it might help
she is also saying to telecom dont be so demanding let  him pay by installments regonise that i am under fiancial duress




[10] Should mediation fail in assisting the parties to reach an agreement as to the amount and timing of any instalments, leave is reserved for Telecom to return to the Authority for an order requiring Mr Evans-McLeod to pay the costs award in full.

another words she is telling us both to be sensible about it again other wise the hammer drops



Costs



[11] Costs relating to this application shall lie where they fall.

means telecom pays and i dont have to plus is indicating to telecom do waste my time with silly bullying shit cause i will make you pay every time dumb fuckers

have decided to make them an offer  lets see how they react









Vicki Campbell

Member of Employment Relations