Search results

Fine. Clearly you've made up your mind. But do us a favor. When you come back to tell us how wrong we all were and how big an award you won from your EEOC claim, make sure you wait long enough to make it believable. Those of us who deal with this as a matter of our jobs have been amused by those...

For the reasons I've been attempting to explain to you; the job market and the economy were in different places when I started in 2010, than when they started in 2021, 2022 and 2023 respectively. And that female co-worker you're not including in your complaint? You'd better, because you just...

Cleo, here is what I am talking about. I have been in my current position for 13 years. I am at the present time the team leader and I do additional duties over and above what the rest of my team does, so I get paid more. However, there are 3 members of my team who have been in place for 1...

If they were hired after you, that's not definitive proof of gender discrimination by a very long shot. Read my first post and also retic's.

The EEOC is only concerned with inequities that are based in a characteristic protected by law. They are not interested in anything that is not related to issues related to race, religion, national origin etc. If you're going to play the EEOC card, you'd better have some valid and supportable...

Tax can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there was now sufficient evidence to try someone else for the same crime, the solution would not be to reopen the case on Watts, but to open a case on the other individual.

And we have long since wandered away from the OP's question, which was answered and acknowledged by him/her back in post #8. Any further discussion can be taken offline, or a new thread opened to that topic.

It is a sad fact of life, very common and yes, legal, that often the first one in is the lowest paid. As the market changes, new people who come in often come in at higher rates, and the employer is not legally obligated to equalize the pay. What the pay equity laws require is not that everyone...

This is primarily a US website and the laws of the US and Canada are not the same; in fact, in some areas they are very different indeed. We have one, and only one, expert in Canadian law here and she doesn't post often, though I will tag her. You may want to look for a Canadian forum in the...

Damn, got me! Mea Culpa, thanks for the catch.

Lainey, I edited your post to remove the names and their email addresses - that is for your protection. I have no objection to your PM'ing the information to the OP if you want to do it that way but not out in public, okay?

Yes. Your online postings can be used against you.

If you can't figure out for yourself why it wouldn't be a good idea for you to be posting the details of your situation out in public for everyone, including everyone at the university, to see, then frankly there's no hope for you.

That's right. No one can. With the amount of information that you can (or should) post on a public internet message board no one can give you odds. I am not convinced you have a case for discrimination; I am neither convinced that you don't. You could try speaking to a local attorney who can...

I work with the ADA in employment law, not education law. However, common sense says that if you request an investigation, it might be found that discrimination took place and it might not. If you don't, it will definitely NOT be found in your favor. Totally up to you how you want to take those...

No, I don't. Nor does Army. We know what state you are posting from. That's all.

He knew the same way I knew - by your IP address, which moderators can access.

What kind of accommodations do you believe you would need?

You are entitled to your opinion. As am I.

Except that I wasn't talking about OG Kush. I was talking about something entirely different. The other responders here know what I meant. You don't have to.