Labor Ready

This all started back in August 2010 when large sums of money was owed to about 15 employees. I was told that the job they were sending us out for, we were supposed to b receiving $29.70 an hour and Claire was only paying $23.60 an hour to all the guys that went out. So we all were made aware of this around April of 2010 that we will be receiving the difference of every hour of every day we worked that was owed.

So every other day it was a different story they said we will be receiving the checks this day then that day, one supervisor would say it would be on Friday, then another one would say we would receive it on Tuesday. That went on for months and if I asked, I would get threatened to be fired. I would only ask them what they would tell me. Well in August 2011 we received what they said was one of the checks and it was only for the hours that I worked for 2010 and the check was for $4,800. I asked where the check for 2011 was at the end of August 2011. So from January 2011 to August 2011, I and many others were owed this money. We kept on getting threatened with termination of our jobs.

Claire knew I have a family and a pregnant wife who cannot work so I need my job. That's why no one could ask about their money. And this went on for months. Capital's own supervisors would call her at the office requesting me and I would be at the office sitting right in front of her and she would tell them, "Oh, he never showed up." I started catching on because they started calling my cell phone and asking if I was okay because I am not one to miss work. And then Claire started the "first come, first served", in which at labor ready corporations. That is not allowed but I played that game. The office opened at 5:30am I would be there at 4:30am, sometimes 4:15am.

I would be first and then she would say it was rotation, so no matter what rule she made up and no matter how it turned out and I was next. She would make up something new and when I would ask her how come every time it came to being my turn, she just bypassed me. She suspended me for a whole week, no warning...nothing. And about 2 weeks ago, she told I was fired because the day before, Aria told me that I was next to go out and when I came in, she sent a guy out that's already been out twice.

So I asked her, "What happened, I was next", she called my name and when I asked her why I was terminated, she screamed for me to get the ** out or she will call the police. So I still do not understand what happened, I have been treated like a piece of crap by this woman. All I want to do is work. I do not know what she has against me. I called her for a letter of termination and she told me, "Absolutely not", and hung up on 3 different occasions. The other supervisor, Maria, even texted my phone and told me I was wrongfully terminated. I have that saved, I have all my paystubs. And the stub from the pay back check. I need help, I owe a lot of money. I am a hard worker. All I want to do is work. She just won't let me.

As I wrote earlier this day, t should not have been a pre-requisite for me to take an online survey, pertaining to qualifications. I took this test in 2000. It's the policy to just take it one time. This should have not been asked of me. Also, there is no reason that I should have failed it. I am not a felon, I don't steal, I am not on drugs, and I don't take drugs. When I asked Daniel what AFDC stood for, he indicated, "I can't help you", yet the reason I went here is to take the safety test. That's all I should have had to take. He should have known, that I already was an employee. I have worked at this Labor Ready before, when Lisa and George worked here. This is discrimination in hiring. If you can't post this, could you please forward this to various applicable agencies? Now, I can't work at any Labor Ready. Because this at-will employee had me take a test, that I already passed.

Today, I went into this branch office to take the safety test. This is what I asked the employee behind the desk. He is described as a male Hispanic adult. Instead of him just providing me the safety test, he insisted I take an online questionnaire. Note that I have been a employee of Labor Ready, since 2000. Prior to this new employee working here, I worked under Lisa and George. Its been the practice of Labor Ready, that all employees only have to take this test once. Then after that, every year just take the safety test. He indicated that all Labor Ready offices are separate, and the computers are not interlinked.

This is a lie.I have gone to various Labor Ready offices, they have a database that is interlinked. For example, I can not work at Labor Ready city of Industry, because of fabricated facts implemented by Susan, when I borrowed and returned the sign in sheet, because it appeared she did not want to pay me when I worked at Office Depot. Their employee/floor manager retaliated, I simply asked if there is a safer way to unclog the shoot. When he was having myself and another employee go down inside a machine, that has rotating parts, that grinds garbage.

Mike ** did not want to provide me all the hours worked. The following day, Susan did not want to pay me, so I called the on duty guard of Office Depot of the City Of Industry, to validate the hours I worked. She grabbed the phone and did not want to pay me, which is a breach in contract. I asked her for my work time sheet. She refused. This left me no evidence to prove I worked at Office Depot, City of Industry. Realizing I needed supporting evidence for the Labor Board, I borrowed the sign in sheet. This was an instrument used, and required to show as evidence an employee was at a certain time in a certain place. I returned this instrument I signed. California Labor Code 432 states that any instrument an employee signs, he is entitled to a copy of it. Then she posted a blog that I stole company property. Labor Ready Corporate office condoned her (retaliation for making a complaint).

They so highly approved of Susan's fabricated facts, to the extent that they promoted her to work at the corporate office, to perhaps train others to be just like her. If other Labor Ready branch offices could see, because of her in house computer blogs in other cities, this obviously means the computer systems are interlinked. Today Mr.Daniel ** had me take a computer online test. It asked questions like, do you take drugs. My answer was no. It asks questions like, do I steal. The answer was no. It asks questions like, do I look for fights or like to fight. The answer was no. It asked me am I on food stamps. The answer was yes. It asked me if I have ever been on AFDC and other programs. I asked Mr. Daniel ** what do these terms mean. His response was ,"I'm sorry I can't help you". His job title says customer service representative.

This is misrepresentation a violation of California Labor Codes:1050-1053. How can a person answer a question, if they are not sure of what the question is asking. This is entrapment, a form of constructive discharge, a violation of California Labor Code:2922. He is also in violation of discrimination in hiring, possibly labor codes:230,230.1, 98.7. California Labor Code:232.5 states that no employer may do any of the following a. require an employee to sign a waiver o r) ( other documents that purports to deny the employee the right to disclose information about the employer's working conditions. This labor codes says allot. It could apply. When today, Mr.Daniel ** refused to just provide me the safety test, because I already took this online survey and passed it, he should have had knowledge that I did.

This was harassment. A violation of California Government Code:12900 discrimination in hiring. When I asked him what does : AFDC stand for, he should have answered my question. This is covered under the : Freedom of Information Act, The Right to Know Act, and The Public Records Act. The branch manager of this branch is responsible for his actions. Now, he indicated I failed this test, which I previously passed and should not have had to take again. He demanded I sign the instrument. He did not give me a copy of it. Also, he stated, "You should not have signed it, unless you read it first".

Labor Ready should not let the findings of this online survey be an excuse to refuse to let me work, nor should they condone of this type of hazing and harassment, or fabricated truth. The computers of Labor Ready are interlinked. He is not an employee to haze, or mislead. His job is to get displaced workers that pass the safety test, and those that already have previously passed the online survey, to just take the safety test. His job is not to show selective enforcment. His job is to be fair and impartial, and treat people like he wants to be treated, not how he wants to treat people.

His last words as he was laughing was, "now you can't work for any Labor Ready for one year, until you pass the online survey". He should be reprimanded then terminated. He is an "at -will employee". The manager of this branch is at fault. She is required to show due care (California Labor Code:2800), with best efforts. (California Labor Code:2924).

Because customer service representative Mr. Daniel **, refused to just let me take the safety test, this means no temp work. Yet, this is an organization that prides itself that they help ex-felons. I am an American veteran. I served my country honorably. I already have taken this online survey test, and previously passed it. He should have just given me the safety test, then given me some work. Most of all, the work is unskilled. How can this company call itself an equal opportunity employer, yet have a branch manager that condones making a previous employee retake the online survey.

If a person takes it one time and passes, it he or she should not have to take it again. Also, there is no reason I should not have passed it. The consequence is unemployment. Please post this. Discrimination in hire and re-hire to an honorably discharged veteran. Labor Ready, ** CA 92683. Phone: (714) 901-9675.

I had worked for Labor Ready many times in the past. You could say that I became somewhat of a regular for a time. The worker at the front desk loved the positive comments about my work ethic that he got from the places he sent me to for employment, so much in fact that he started saving the best jobs for my brother and me to have because we were always the best dressed and had the best attitudes.

Recently being laid off from my fulltime job, I decided to go back to college and find part-time work. Labor Ready came to mind immediately because I could work it into my schedule. When I went in to see what I needed to do to begin work, I was told that I needed to fill out an application and that they were only taken on Mondays. Being that it was a Friday, I left and made plans to be back bright and early on Monday morning.

To my avail, on Monday morning, I was also told that there were not enough Labor Ready employees available to allow me to fill out an application because one of them was driving workers to and from job sites. I have my own vehicle and would also be willing to transport workers just like I used to before this application process. I just really want to fill out the application so that I can begin making money to support my family, but I feel like the employees at this Labor Ready are just too lazy to allow me to do so. They won't give me a time to come back. They only said to call at 8 am and that applications are taken at 9 am. This makes no sense to me. Why can't I fill out an application form at any time of the day or why can't I at least be told a specific time?

I am unemployed at the moment and this is why I'm trying Labor Ready. I have already wasted gas driving there for three days and also paid a ridiculous amount of money for a daycare to watch my child when I could have done it myself. I called True Blue but they can't help anyone either. This is a great way to make money when you really need it, but it's hard to do that if you can't even get the beginning process out of the way.

The standards and the worker preference that Christine, a branch manager, goes by are sad and reflect poorly on Labor Ready as an industry. I have recently had to return to Labor Ready between jobs so I could "get by" with gas and transportation. By no means have I been trying to count this as a career. The last couple of times I've tried to rely on Labor Ready, I had not been sent out or even acknowledged. I simply signed in and took a seat. I was dressed appropriately, had brought a lunch, have a car, and a good cell number for contact.

Not to mention, I've been dispatched from this same branch many times in the past and am aware of what type of work is available and that I do qualify for the majority of assignments. So here I am, dressed and ready to work. I sat and heard the phone rang. And then Christine made a call, and I overheard her telling the receiver that she has a job and asking how soon she can be there. I was shocked!

So I waited, and again, another phone call came in. And another call went out to someone who wasn't even ready! Then another call.... She then called 4 men to the front counter, told them they had a job and asked if they were dressed for the job. The one man had on b-ball shorts and running shoes; another came in with his sandals on. They both stated they would need to run home and change! Really! I understand the "best match" standard, but I have always came dressed and prepared for the job and am frustrated when this happens. I cannot lower my self to kissing butt and providing lattes, just so I can get a daily job.

I believe highly in fairness, and although there is absolutely nothing I can do but complain on a blog, I'll continue to sit and pray for the day I get sent out to work, so I can scrounge up enough money to get gas to continue to drive my kids to school. Unlike the many (not all) who only come to work to get enough money for beer and cigarettes, my personality is that of which I tell people what I think and voice my opinions.

But, in this case, it would only put me lower on the list and further from her mind for work. I have made complaints to corporate, but I'm looked at as just an uneducated bum looking for drinking money... ha... Not really. I've gone to college to be a computer tech and am currently a Nursing student just trying to raise my kids. But no thanks to the economy and self-absorbed people, I am forced into this cat-and-mouse game called Labor Ready. Thank you and goodbye.

Today, May 19, 2011, I arrived at 05:30 A.M. to work. Cathy called me to the front lobby desk. She had not one skilled job. To work for a company named Valley Crest, the job is racking for eight hours on the side of a mountain. Note: After I have asked her more than one time to please not ask me to give rides and provide transportation to people I do not know, she did it again. I never read it anywhere that this is a pre-requisite to working for Labor Ready. I could have made $58.00. Yet she sent lots of people on jobs who do not have cars.

But to depend on other people to provide them rides--how is this (Best Match Dispatch)? Numerous temps here depend on others for a ride. Also, I asked Cathy if she could have helped me on gas. She refused. Normally, they help people with an advance--meaning, they just deduct from the amount of money earned.

Also, as a result, I made no money for gas or to buy minutes for my TracFone. To what extent of this hazing and harassment does True Blue or Silent Whisper intervene? If this is not harassment, what is? Government Code:12900. Retaliation for making a complaint. Labor Code:6310. Constructive discharge. Labor Code:2922. Why can't they provide us new staff that does not show favoritism in dispatching work? Also that do not demand or make it a condition of employment to give rides just to get work? Will the manager condone of Cathy's actions today?

It appears on more than one occasion. I come or arrive early to work, yet, it appears the office staff pass me up for work. With permission of the branch manager, William **. The work is primarily general labor. I past the safety test. Note: not one time have I been sent out to work by me. Cathy sent me to the wrong address. Yet, these actions needs to be approved of by True Blue of the Labor Ready Corporation. Why? It's suppose to be an equal opportunity employer. It's March 24,2011. Note: I have only been sent on three jobs for one month. Some of the employees appear to have a back ground. I am not better. I just want to work. I am a veteran. Why doesn't True Blue correct this? Are they not in charge?

Recently, I requested to speak with the branch manager, William ** in private. His response is about the economy and not too many jobs. Yet, today there was the opportunity to go on a job to work at the Anaheim Hilton, 777 Convention Way Anaheim ,Calif 92802. The prerequisites were black paints black t-shirt. Another temporary provided this. Yesterday, the same people were sent out. Cathy would not give me no work. Why? I work safe.

I would like True Blue to be investigated. This is not in good ethics and is selective enforcement. Today I asked Cathy if they were going to send me to anyone else. They indicated no and that's it for now. I responded, "Thanks for all the work. " I came to this Labor Ready since Monday at between 05:30AM and 06:00 AM. Yet, some employees were sent out not even in the office but were called in. Why True Blue?

Yesterday I was given a job as a temporary employee. I have been out of work for some time. My previous job was seasonal. So, I came here to work to obtain some funds to fix my car. Sir William ** called me to the front lobby desk. He stated, "Are you ready to work hard?" Then, I replied, "Yes." Cathy, it appears, deliberately gave me false and misleading information. She gave me the following directions to a job site I had never been to: 2031 S. Anne St., Santa Ana, CA 92704. I called the client and left a message. His name is Ron. I called the Labor Ready branch. I asked for directions. It sounded too confusing so I drove to the office to get some directions. I finally made it to the job site. My job was to do demolition or construction clean up. When I arrived, the client Ron was gone for the day. The job site was 7 Shell Beach, Newport Beach, CA 92657. I was instructed to come back to the office. I was paid for two hours. Mr. William ** stated he was sorry.

If Cathy really wanted me to get some work, she would have provided the correct directions. This was prior to handing me the paperwork. Prior to this, she offered me a job and then gave it to someone else. She sent me to the Social Security office to verify I was authorized to work. This was after I have been a previous employee. After this, Cathy of Labor Ready, Costa Mesa had me take two people in my car. On one occasion, the first guy offered no gas money and yelled out of the window. The second guy offered no gas money and threw a cigarette out the window. In 2010, after waiting many times in the lobby, even after arriving early, Cathy did not provide me any work, except for the two four-hour jobs.

Today, approximately 7:40 am, Feb. 4, 2011, I received a ticket because I was parked at Norms and did not want to get a ticket. I made a left on Harbor and another left into Labor Ready. So, the officer gave a ticket. The parking at this Labor Ready is bad. There were three parking stalls for staff only, two for temporary employees. Today I overheard Sir William ** offer two other temporary employees work for this weekend. He offered me nothing. This selective enforcement is perfectly okay with the corporate office. Yet yesterday, Cathy gave me false and misleading information. The corporate office appears to condone the violation of Labor Code 1050-1053.

She paid me for two hours. She should have given me the correct directions and ahead of time so I could have been to the client on time. Her actions appear to be deliberate with the motive and intent to retaliate and harass. The only ones that don't complain are the ones she gives work to, with permission of Sir William **. I have arrived with no work. Their slogan would be "best match dispatch". How many jobs since the beginning of 2011 have been those type of jobs that require a state license or extensive years of experience? Perhaps upon investigation, the answer would be or could be zero to none.

Today, I went to Labor Ready in the City of Fullerton, California. I walked up to the front lobby. I was informed by Maria to come back on Tuesdays at 2:30 pm. Then, Steve ** called me over to his portion of the front lobby desk. He mentioned or asked me my name. He then looked something up on his computer. He appeared to start brow beating me and badgering me pertaining to leaving some job. He asked why I supposedly left a ten-hour job and only did six hours. I asked if this is in writing. He then used silence of an entity.

This is based on time of discovery. California Government Code: 911.64 and 911.23. He also did not provide the name of the company he is accusing me of leaving. He should have. In constitutional law, the 6th Amendment states the right to know what you are accused of and who your accuser is. It does not say it must be in a court of law. He should provide all the facts, not just be judge and jury. He should provide all the facts prior to posting any negative blogs on any person. He should have provided the name of this so-called company that is insinuating that I had advanced knowledge pertaining to a ten hour job that I left for a six hour.

The reason he should have provided this information is it is covered under the freedom of information act, the public records act, also the right to know act. Then, when he could not offer this reasonable information, he said, "Get out. I don't like you're attitude." Isn't this discrimination in hiring under Government code 12900? Recently in 2010, I was the first one in line; signed the first on the sign-in sheet. He again stated, "Get out. You look too tired." An employee standing outside agreed that we're all tired. Look how early we have to be here? The office opens at 5:00 am.

This is the second time Steve ** has been rude and arrogant without good cause. What I fail to understand is the company advertises it's an equal opportunity employer. Yet isn't Steve ** required to show due care: California Labor Code 2800? How does his choice of words coincide with Labor Ready company policy? "Get out of here. I don't like you're attitude." Just because I asked him if it were in writing that I had advanced knowledge of a ten hour shift or because I asked him for the name of the company that he is accusing me of leaving early.

I suppose this is okay with the corporate office. Most of the employees are ex-convicts and a very small portion is composed of displaced workers. Isn't Steve ** the same branch manager that was in charge of sending an intoxicated female to work at the Fullerton Car Auction? The answer is yes. She was intoxicated and caused lots of monetary damage. Who was in charge? Steve **, Manager of Fullerton Labor Ready. Also, another former employee informed me he got his toes smashed at the Brea account, where doors were required to be moved. He indicated that since workman compensation was involved, he was also experiencing hazing and harassment from office staff .Who again is in charge? Branch manager, Steve **.

How does corporate Labor Ready condone him as an employee when it appears that he shows a pattern of willful neglect and harassment? He should be polite. If a person is being accused of an issue, prior to posting a blog, he should obtain all the facts rather than be judge and jury. I do recall a certain construction contractor that laughed extensively when I informed him the mobile heavy equipment operator wet my entire body with a hose. He then signed my paper as I was drenched and very wet. Maria, at times in the past, reflected to some account they claim I left early.

However, to this day, I can't recall or see anything in writing that I was offered a ten hour job. Could all this retaliation stem from the slanderous remarks coming out of Labor Ready in the City of Industry? This is where branch manager Brenda ** works. They are all interlinked. Or is Steve ** allowed to talk to people like garbage by permission of True Blue, Shawna? To this day, she is perfectly okay with the slander coming out of the City of Industry. She is under Brenda**. Why is Steve ** allowed to verbally abuse people? Just because I asked if this was in writing that I had advanced knowledge pertaining to a ten hour job which I left for a six hour job or just because I asked for the name of that company, his response this morning at 6:30 am. was, "Get out of here. I don't like you're attitude."?

What he was really saying is he does not consider me American enough to be entitled to have the opportunity to use the First Amendment in public policy. With the fact that I was honoring my religious beliefs to the extent as I exercised them, it appears that he showed discrimination to my religious beliefs. So, he does not respect my beliefs. And because he refused to honor my religious beliefs, his verbal abuse with aggressive arrogance was as follows "Get out of here. I don't like you're attitude!" What he really meant was you are not American enough to be able to exercise you're freedom of speech within the First Amendment and within public policy. What he also meant was that he does not want people to think any different than himself.

It says in the Holy Bible, "He that studies a situation is wise." So, today, I was striving to study the situation that branch manager Steve ** showed discrimination to my religious beliefs. He refused to show supporting evidence that I had advanced knowledge of a ten hour shift. He also used silence of an entity based on time of discovery, California Government Codes: 911.64 and 911.23, when all I asked him was the name of the accusing company that is accusing me of leaving early. I asked Steve for all the evidence that he refused to comply with my verbal requests, yet he should have provided this information under the Freedom of Information Act, the Right to Know Act, the Public Records Act, or even the 6th Amendment - the right to know what you are accused of and who you're accuser is.

Therefore, everyone must see things like he does or they're wrong. This is completely against public policy because it allows Steve ** to show discrimination to people's religious beliefs. This is a violation of Government Code 12900. His choice of words are also not in the employee handbook that he signed when he agreed to work for Labor Ready as a representative. Where in the employee handbook does it state to verbally and falsely yell and accuse someone of an act without all the facts? For example, if Steve ** is insinuating that I left some job, what are the mitigating circumstances? Was I hurt or drenched and water soaked? Or was he being told by the corporate office to find anything to make a case? Since Shawna of True Blue is condoning of the slander and deformation coming out of Labor Ready City of Industry.

This is where Susan used to work, where Sofia could still work, and Brenda Lopez was allowed to post half-truths of slander and defamation of character to acts she never noticed in her person or in front of her. The Holy Bible in Romans Chapter 3 verses 10 says, "None are righteous. No, not one." California Labor Code 2924 states that for an act to be an act, it must be proven that the act was willful with motive and intent. Did Brenda ** prove this? No. Then, why is Shawna of the corporate office of True Blue aiding and abetting the slander coming out of City of Industry? Why is Shawna of True Blue Labor Ready Corporate office condoning to the discrimination in hiring and the verbal abuse by Steve **, branch manager Fullerton Labor Ready 696 E. Commonwealth Ave. Fullerton CA 92831, and also the policy Best Match Dispatch.

If all the people who were waiting in the lobby passed the test, why the favoritism? It should be, why slumber pick a number? This stops the office staff from showing selective enforcement or showing favoritism. Also, the office staff should not ask people to give rides. It's the responsibility for people that shows up to get their own ride.

Today, I went to Labor Ready Costa Mesa, California. Yesterday, I waited all day for work but nothing. Cathy did have my phone number but she did not call me even once. Prior to this, for the year of 2010, she only gave me two jobs. On some occasions, I did have some temporary long term jobs in between. When I asked the new branch manager, William ** for a good reference, he hesitated. He has his cushy little job. The employees are out there striving to work hard and the least that he could do is to provide a good reference. The corporate office is indifferent and they know what I have to say.

Cathy asked me twice to give rides, as though I am a taxi service, to some people that I do not even know. Both occasions were two bad experiences. The first guy yelled out the window and did not offer gas money. The second guy threw a cigarette out the window subjecting me to a ticket. She worded this to me in such a format as it sounded like a condition for getting work. This appears to be hazing.

Today, Cathy bluntly and arrogantly told me to move my car so the other female staff could park her car. William ** is supposed to be the manager but he appears to be a biased, has favoritism, arrogant and egocentric. There are only two places to park. But he himself and his two prima donnas have three parking spots. My question is prior to William ** arriving, I have been on many jobs. I strive to work safe and as directed. Yet, since this empty arrogant has been here, his two arrogant prima donnas only gave me approximately two jobs for the entire year of 2010. I would hope to find a good lawyer to sue Labor Ready for allowing this hazing and discrimination. This repeat garbage is exactly this.

If this company is an equal opportunity employer, they should give every one the opportunity to work honestly and safely. Also, the staff should be aware that any full and long-term employee, as well as, short-term employee is entitled to a copy of anything they sign. If corporate Labor Ready is an equal opportunity employer, then why am I always complaining about Brenda **, branch manager of the City of Industry, in her false, half truths. It now appears that corporate Labor Ready could now be retaliating against me for making a complaint. This is obviously constructive discharge. I can't even count the times I came early and waited for a job, yet see the same people going out. With obvious favoritism approved of by the corporate office, I can't be that bad. Labor Ready has never paid me for a workman compensation claim.

Why is corporate Labor Ready allowing William ** to use selective enforcement? Why can't he do anything about the parking so employees can park their cars while waiting for a job? I can't count how many times I waited for a job to see Cathy walk out of Labor Ready laughing and joking. Could it be because William ** allows them to abuse their position and show favoritism in giving jobs? It's all primarily general labor. I did loading and unloading jobs, demolition, hole digging. How many other people have observed favoritism by William **?

If they can't be equal opportunity employers, maybe the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission should shut them down. The Labor Ready in the City of Industry is still run by Brenda **. Here I am, an American veteran. They used to have posters of joining the Army National Guard. I served seven years in the Army, seven years in the Marines and seven years in the Army National Guard. I served in Operation Restore Hope and Operation Desert Shield. Yet the corporate office of Labor Ready condone this selective enforcement, hazing, harassment in giving and in the distribution of all primarily general labor jobs.

Most of the temporary employees, from what I have observed, are ex-convicts and some are displaced workers that could have recently got laid off. The right way to distribute these general labor jobs without giving opportunity for any of the staff to show bigotry or to be biased is to have a number that would carry over until the end of the week. This will work and can work because if a person can't do the job, he can refuse the job. The staff at Labor Ready should give the job and pay correctly the same day. Also, they should not put any private information on the counter to be displayed to the public like payroll check information.

Recently, I spoke with True Blue. The female apparently appeared to be very ignorant to hazing and harassment. It's not what she was subjected to, it's what the victim was subjected to. She appeared to choose not a mediator position, but rather a none caring, nonchalant position. So, True Blue is the excuse to justify favoritism and false write ups like Brenda ** has in the City of Industry.

Jesus Christ said, "First, take the beam out of your eye before we try to take the speck out of someone else." So, what legal actions can be brought at this time is unknown. But hopefully, other victims can and eventually will rise to the occasion in discrimination and in the distribution of work. Perhaps, these actions could be somehow persuaded at and from the corporate office. Why is Brenda ** being allowed to post her slander and continue her discriminating in hiring and providing work in the City Of Industry? For an act to be an act, it must be proven that the act was willful and deliberate.