Tuesday, March 26, 2013

PROGRESS


PROGRESS

THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY HAS ACCEPTED MY CLAIMS AND WE MOVE FORWARD

UNABLE TO PRINT TELECOMS STATEMENT OF REPLY AS THE MADE IT UNDER THE ACT PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
now postponed till 3.30pm same day 
they are in for a surprise 

From: Boon Lee [mailto:Boon.Lee@era.govt.nz] 
Sent: Monday, 25 March 2013 12:26 p.m.
To: Paul Mcleod; 'John Rooney'
Subject: RE: Request for a Conference Call; File#: 5412923 Paul Alan Evans-McLeod and Telecom New Zealand Ltd

Dear Parties,

The Authority member, Jim Crichton, can take the call on Monday 8 April 2013 at 11am. Please confirm your availability on this new date and time. 



Kind regards, 
Boon Lee
Support Officer
Employment Relations Authority | Te Ratonga Ahumana Taimahi 
10th Floor 280 Centre 280 Queen Street | PO Box 105 117 | Auckland | New Zealand 
Tel: +64 9 970 1571 | Fax: +64 9 970 1579 
Email: boon.lee@era.govt.nz ; Website: www.era.govt.nz
Be very aware  some if not all of the names below are the subject of a still open complaint for fraud with the Hamilton police

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
Like ·  ·  ·  · Promote

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Persistance Pays


Persistance Pays

My persistence has paid off..
Independent investigator advice hits the mark.

For those that have followed my trials and tribulations we  have after all this time succeeded in placing Telecom before the Employment Relations authority.
Changing tack and seeking the assistance of an independent  investigator has borne fruit
Below is the revised statement of problem that was required by the authority.

applicant                     Paul Alan Evans-McLeod
Address of applicant:               17 Minnie Place  Pukete Hamilton
and
Full name of respondent: Telecom New Zealand Limited (Telecom)
Address of respondent   c/o John Rooney partner Simpson Grierson Private Bag 92518 Auckland 1141

To the Employment Relations Authority
And to the respondent

Statement of problem (or matter)
1.    The problem (or matter) that I wish the Authority to resolve is:
With regard to section 114 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 paragraph

 (4)On an application under subsection (3), the Authority, after giving the employer an opportunity to be heard, may grant leave accordingly, subject to such conditions (if any) as it thinks fit, if the Authority—
    • (a)is satisfied that the delay in raising the personal grievance was occasioned by exceptional circumstances (which may include any 1 or more of the circumstances set out in section 115); and
    • (b)considers it just to do so.

It is occasioned by exceptional circumstances namely:

An alleged verbal compliant from an intellectually handicapped girl was used to commence a disciplinary procedure against myself.
I am disputing the fact that this complaint occurred as no substantive verifiable proof can be provided by Telecom despite frequent requests since the commencement of the disciplinary action
It represents a fraud against me, and the identity theft against the girl with the intellectual disability.

It is just to do so: as this act by telecom violated principles of good faith when Telecom engaged in my disciplinary process that relied on the integrity of that which they provided, and thus impacted consequent  agreements entered “freely entered into” in ‘good faith” which should thus be negated and required to be revisited
Requests for the specific information were not honoured.






With regard to

Further provision regarding exceptional circumstances under section 114
  • For the purposes of section 114(4)(a), exceptional circumstances include—
    • (a)where the employee has been so affected or traumatised by the matter giving rise to the grievance that he or she was unable to properly consider raising the grievance within the period specified in section 114(1);

At the time of the disciplinary action I was subjected to a sustained and deliberate process of micromanagement against the achievement of impossible targets ( part of which was having a standard of being 100% right  100% of the time) and repeated disciplinary meetings within each working week on a continuous basis for a period of about eight months. This is attested to in emails obtained under the Privacy act consequent to my exit, from Bridgette Dalzell advising that “Shaun and Michelle had a good rhythm going and it normal takes him two days to calm down.” .
Shaun Hoult is my team leader , Michelle Young his manager.
 A further email from Trish Keith Telecom National General Manager advised she was aware I was very distressed.
Ian Galloway HR telecom ,and Michelle Young acknowledged within these disciplinary meeting that I was being micromanaged on two occasions (which can be defined as work place bullying) confirming the deliberate process, the effect of this  resulted in severe chest pain immediately after meetings requiring medical attention, (Note. The disciplinary action commenced shortly after return from work from an heart operation). The mental pressure deliberately imposed has left me with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) as advised by my doctor, whom expressed her concerns directly to telecom particularly as I already under treatment from her for bipolar , manic depression, which telecom was aware of throughout my employment and prior to this disciplinary procedure.

Thus I was unable to probably consider raising the grievance within the period specified

I am claiming these actions amongst others by my employer were unjustified.
·         A fraudulent non existent verbal complaint from a intellectually impaired girl
·         A disciplinary action based on this complaint
·         Deliberate micro management to affect my mental state and ability to reason to my detriment






2.       The facts that have given rise to the problem (or matter) are:
Requests for audio files, verbatim transcripts , or any documentation regarding the complete process have typically been ignored, or a have had disingenuous response, or advice has been received , that files no longer exist, or did not exist under section 29(2)(b) of the privacy act
I contend that no verbal compliant was made by the girl with the intellectual disability

1  Give enough detail to ensure that the Authority and the respondent are fully, fairly, and clearly informed.
Form 1 - continued
3.       I would like the problem (or matter) to be resolved in the following way:1 2
I request that the intellectually handicapped girl be interviewed first, to confirm that a verbal complaint was laid by her, with regard to my previous interactions with her, this will determine the veracity of each of the following peoples statements and contentions regarding this matter.
Bridgette Dalzell , Hannah Sullivan ,Iain Galloway, Shaun Hoult and Michelle Young

After the authority has spoken with the girl. I request that the people mentioned then be individually interviewed without the others present and that they be requested to verify and confirm all statements, views, content and contentions with regard to this specific matter

That they also all be separated both before and after to avoid collusion

Resolution of this matter requires the determination as to whether the girl made a verbal compliant, if she has not, then does this fraudulent act impact on other employment matters which Telecom engaged in with my disciplinary process that relied on the integrity of that which they all provided, particularly those agreements entered “freely entered into” in ‘good faith” now found to be fraudulent.
The authority to make a determination regarding: Are these negated and required to be revisited.
The authority to make a determination: Are there other offences under the Crimes Act, Defamation Act or any other relevant laws committed by any and all either jointly and severally?
The remedies I seek are , but not limited to:
·         reinstatement of my  former position or the placement a position no less advantageous
·          reimbursement of a sum equal to the whole or any part of the wages or other money lost as a result of the grievance:
·         the payment of compensation by the  employer, including compensation for
humiliation, loss of dignity,   and injury to the feelings, loss of any benefit, whether or not of a monetary kind,  might reasonably have been expected to obtain if the personal grievance had not arisen:
I have lost the benefit of good health and possible life expectancy.
My marriage and personal relationships have suffered immensely

·          if the Authority or the court finds that any workplace conduct or practices are a significant factor in the personal grievance, recommendations to the employer concerning the action the employer should take to prevent similar employment relationship problems occurring:

 Practise of micromanagement was a significant factor

Concerning the action the employer should take in  respect of the person who made the request or was guilty of the harassing behaviour, which action may include the transfer of that person, the taking of disciplinary action against that person, or the taking of rehabilitative action in respect of that person about any other action that it is necessary for the employer to take to prevent further harassment of the employee concerned or any other employee.




4.       I attach copies of the following documents (which I think are relevant to the problem):3
          Attachment 1  Manner described by customer
         Attachment 2   Manager referring to purported statement from non-existent complaint   
         Attachment  3  Additional reference to TWO customer complaints
         Attachment 4 Reference to verbal complaints
        Attachment   5 Alleging the customer described the calls
        Attachment    6 Latest requests   





Mediation
5.       Have you, the applicant, tried to resolve this problem (or matter) by using mediation services provided by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment?                        Yes ¨              No ¨X

6.       Have you, the applicant, tried to resolve this problem (or matter) by using mediation provided by someone other than the Department of Labour?           Yes ¨              No ¨X

7.       Have you, the applicant, taken any other steps of any kind to resolve the problem (or matter)?                                                                       Yes ¨X                        No ¨
If the answer to this question is "Yes", specify the other steps taken:
Addressed the contention of fraud with Department of Labour, lodged compliant with Police, Privacy Commission, Ombudsman, Telecom Ceo (past and present) Telecom Board Members of Parliament, Prime Minister Leaders of all Parties, and currently preparing a petition to House of Representatives to request of Telecom, the verifiable specifics of the alleged verbal complaint and other matters being denied to me by Telecom since the onset. The matter is most easily addressed by any of the members of any of these departments, interviewing the girl whom allegedly made the verbal complaint, my preferred option. Ministers of the Crown have advised that they view it as fraud, and therefore a matter for the Police. The Police view it as an employment matter. Raising the matter via this process seems to be a logical alternative to the bureaucratic ping pong engaged in by Government Departments. The Petition to Parliament requires all avenues be pursued prior; this action complies with that request. I have requested the details of the intellectually disabled girl so that an independent investigator can determine the truth via an appropriately prescribed process, this has been denied to me, I am very aware of the distress this may cause with this girl and would rather avoid it. One of my advisors conscious of this has been in touch with the head office of the IHC to determine, what support, process is appropriate.
8.       If you, the applicant, have answered "No" to both the question in paragraph 5 and the question in paragraph 6, please indicate why you have not used mediation to try to resolve the problem (or matter):
All straight forward requests for verifiable information, has met with disingenuous responses, denials or advice that files no longer exist. There is no verifiable evidence of process within Telecom around the verbal complaint, notes taken at onset, verbatim transcriptions, written notes of discussions within management, or any indication that the girl’s concerns have been actioned and signed off to the girl’s satisfaction. There has been no opportunity provided to myself to attest to accuracy of any of these discussions and facts presented. All of which under privacy provisions I am entitled to, it has not been provided thus far , and is unlikely to be provided within mediation. All five managers etc. mentioned were across the process, all have been given the opportunity to correct the situation they have not.

Fee
9.       This application is accompanied by the prescribed fee. Will be via internet banking with the reference Evans-McLeod or McLeod.
Signature of applicant:..................................................
Date:.............................
1  Give enough detail to ensure that the Authority and the respondent are fully, fairly, and clearly informed.
2   Please include reference to any specific remedy (being a remedy under any enactment or rule of law) that you are seeking. If the applicant is an employee who is seeking, by this application, an order, under section 127(l) of the Employment Relations Act 2000, for the employee’s interim reinstatement, the applicant must, at the time of lodging this application, file a signed undertaking in Form 2.
3   List here all the documents that are attached, e.g. your employment agreement or letters that you wish to rely on, or documents required under any other legislation, etc.
Form 1-continued
Notice to the respondent
1.       If you intend to respond to this application, you must, within 14 days after the date of the service* of this application on you, lodge 2 copies of a Statement in Reply with an officer of the Employment Relations Authority at [                                         ].
Note that Regulation 8 of the Employment Relations Authority Regulations 2000 allows the Authority to direct a shorter period in any particular case
2.       The term days (in paragraph 1 of this notice) does not include any day in the period beginning with 25 December in any year and ending with 5 January in the following year.
3.       You will be notified of the place, date, and time at which the Authority will conduct any investigation meeting, in respect of this application.


Officer of the Employment Relations Authority: ...............................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................
Date:.......................................           
This application is lodged by Paul Evans-McLeod.................................. , whose address for service is
 17 Minnie Place Pukete Hamilton.......................................................... and whose telephone
number is 07 8494584.............. and whose fax number for service is …………………….……. and whose

document exchange number for service is ……………………………... and whose e‑mail address for

service is paul.evans-mcleod@xtra.co.nz……...…………………………………………… .4

or

This application is lodged by............................................................ on behalf of the above named

applicant, whose address for service is .……………………………………………...…………

…………………………………………………………………..and whose telephone number is

……………………. and whose fax number for service is …………………….……. and whose document

exchange number for service is ……………………………... and whose e‑mail address for service is

………...…………………………………………… .4

4   Although a full postal address must always be supplied, the supply of a telephone number and the supply for service of any 1 or more of the following, namely, a fax number, a document exchange number, or an e-mail address are optional.


Sunday, March 3, 2013

I swear that ....#2

I swear that ....#2

I have just received this from my independent advisor
Paul,
I have finally had some time to further look at the issues that you raised with regarding the action your are engaged in re employment.
Should your contention re the purported verbal complaint be proven, then a cursory reading of the Crimes Act reveals that the following laws may apply, see below, these would need to be examined in depth , to determine further outcomes, so do not read them as literal yet...I will continue to assist as time permits...it certainly is an interesting exercise.
can you confirm those documents signed off as true and correct , that you have, or will request.
Anyway for your consideration and review, it is early in the journey
cheers

113Fabricating evidence
• Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, with intent to mislead any tribunal holding any judicial proceeding to which section 108 applies, fabricates evidence by any means other than perjury.
Compare: 1908 No 32 s 135
110False oaths
• Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who, being required or authorised by law to make any statement on oath or affirmation, thereupon makes a statement that would amount to perjury if made in a judicial proceeding.
66Parties to offences
• (1)Every one is a party to and guilty of an offence who—
o (a)actually commits the offence; or
o (b)does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence; or
o (c)abets any person in the commission of the offence; or
o (d)incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit the offence.
70Offence committed other than offence intended
• (1)Every one who incites, counsels, or procures another to be a party to an offence of which that other is afterwards guilty is a party to that offence, although it may be committed in a way different from that which was incited, counselled, or suggested.
(2)Every one who incites, counsels, or procures another to be a party to an offence is a party to every offence which that other commits in consequence of such inciting, counselling, or procuring, and which the first-mentioned person knew to be likely to be committed in consequence thereof.
240Obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception
• (1)Every one is guilty of obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception who, by any deception and without claim of right,—
o (a)obtains ownership or possession of, or control over, any property, or any privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, directly or indirectly; or
o (b)in incurring any debt or liability, obtains credit; or
o (c)induces or causes any other person to deliver over, execute, make, accept, endorse, destroy, or alter any document or thing capable of being used to derive a pecuniary advantage; or
o (d)causes loss to any other person.
(2)In this section, deception means—
o (a)a false representation, whether oral, documentary, or by conduct, where the person making the representation intends to deceive any other person and—
 (i)knows that it is false in a material particular; or
 (ii)is reckless as to whether it is false in a material particular; or
o (b)an omission to disclose a material particular, with intent to deceive any person, in circumstances where there is a duty to disclose it; or
o (c)a fraudulent device, trick, or stratagem used with intent to deceive any person.
257Using forged documents
• (1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, knowing a document to be forged,—
o (a)uses the document to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration; or
o (b)uses, deals with, or acts upon the document as if it were genuine; or
o (c)causes any other person to use, deal with, or act upon it as if it were genuine.
(2)For the purposes of this section, a document made or altered outside New Zealand in a manner that would have amounted to forgery if the making or alteration had been done in New Zealand is to be regarded as a forged document.
258Altering, concealing, destroying, or reproducing documents with intent to deceive
• (1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, with intent to obtain by deception any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, or to cause loss to any other person,—
o (a)alters, conceals, or destroys any document, or causes any document to be altered, concealed, or destroyed; or
o (b)makes a document or causes a document to be made that is, in whole or in part, a reproduction of any other document.
(2)An offence against subsection (1) is complete as soon as the alteration or document is made with the intent referred to in that subsection, although the offender may not have intended that any particular person should—
o (a)use or act upon the document altered or made; or
o (b)act on the basis of the absence of the document concealed or destroyed; or
o (c)be induced to do or refrain from doing anything.
259Using altered or reproduced document with intent to deceive
• (1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, knowing any document to have been made or altered in the manner and with the intent referred to in section 258, with intent to obtain by deception any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, or to cause loss to any other person,—
o (a)uses, or deals with, or acts upon, the document; or
o (b)causes any person to use or deal with, or act upon, the document.
(2)For the purposes of this section, it does not matter that the document was altered or made outside New Zealand.
Compare: 1961 No 43 s 266B
332Indictment for perjury or fraud
• (1)No count charging perjury, the making of a false oath or of a false statement, or the fabrication of evidence, or procuring the commission of any of those crimes, shall be deemed insufficient on the ground that it does not state the nature or the authority of the tribunal before which the oath or statement was taken or made, or the subject of the inquiry, or the words used, or the evidence fabricated, or that it does not expressly negative the truth of the words used; but the court may order that the prosecutor shall furnish further particulars in writing of what is relied on in support of the charge.
(2)No count charging any false pretence, or any fraud, or any attempt or conspiracy by fraudulent means, shall be deemed insufficient because it does not set out in detail in what the false pretence, or the fraud, or the fraudulent means consisted; but the court may order that the prosecutor shall furnish further particulars in writing of those matters, or any of them.

and here is the kicker with me, putting in a statement of problem and if they want to take it the investigation stage
two things will transpire
one they will be put under oath so lying is perjury
two one of the sunday papers has responded to my expression of interest  so the media will be doing a feature






Be very aware  some if not all of the names below are the subject of a still open complaint for fraud with the Hamilton police

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