![]() Again, the three reasons all deal with the way supervisors treat employees. The reasons that Hobbs gave for firing Adams were more personnel related issues than issues related to race or sex, so your reasons for not answering the questions makes no sense. In fact, you haven’t criticized ANY Republican for the institutional sexual discrimination that flourished in the Republican-controlled Senate. I can’t help but think that your poor judgment, belligerence, and lack of professionalism (and I would add vindictiveness), which got you fired in the first place, are also the reasons that you are publicly castigating Secretary Hobbs, instead of the real culprit here – Andy Biggs. You unprofessionally complained to the entire Democratic Caucus leadership about your pay, despite them having no control of that, and you having already been told how to make your allegations known through proper channels.You unprofessionally missed work (forcing staff to re-assign your unfinished assignments) without notifying any Members or your supervisor that you had to be absent due to a medical emergency of your adult son, and.Flores at a meeting in front of the entire caucus, because she got the job you wanted Lisette Flores, and the Democratic Caucus members and staff when you acted in a manner that was “belligerent, aggressive, and just unprofessional”, by “demeaning” Ms. You embarrassed yourself, your colleague Ms.Secretary Hobbs was very clear about the reasons she, and Senate Republican chief of staff Wendy Baldo, and Democratic chief of staff Jeff Winkler, all agreed that they needed to fire you: You SHOULD be angry – at the GOP majority, and specifically, at Andy Biggs for systemic and institutional sexist discrimination.īut you are NOT calling Andy Biggs unfit for office in your press releases and statements.Īnd you are NOT calling on Andy Biggs to resign for discriminating against you.Īnd you are NOT intimating that Andy Biggs is a racist, as – I can assure you – HE actually IS.Īren’t you really just blaming Secretary Hobbs because she is the most prominent and controversial target you could find to make the biggest noise in the press?Īren’t you really just angry at Secretary Hobbs because she lost faith in your judgment and professionalism, and said so publicly? So why ARE you attacking Secretary Hobbs? I wonder if you are making that racial insinuation only now because it is more believable to the public that a white woman discriminated against you due to your race, than it is that a woman in elected politics discriminated against you because you are a woman? You must be, because the court found nothing about racial discrimination in your case, let alone that Secretary Hobbs acted out of any racial animus, as you insinuate. Yet, now you are questioning Secretary Hobbs’ fitness for office? Why?īecause you think Secretary Hobbs discriminated or retaliated against you because you are a woman? Secretary Hobbs bears no liability for the compensation the jury awarded you. Secretary Hobbs was merely a fact witness, one listed on your own witness list, one whose testimony helped you win your case. Secretary Hobbs was not a defendant in your lawsuits. Senate President Andy Biggs allocated the staff budgets, and set the sexually-discriminatory pay, and fostered the discriminatory work culture that resulted in the injustice you suffered. Nowhere in the record is ANY evidence that you complained to decision-makers about disparate pay based on your race, and the court found that the evidence concerning your complaint of sex-based pay disparities alone was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. The courts found the defendant, the Arizona Senate, discriminated against you in pay and conditions of employment because of your sex, but not due to your race. Secretary Hobbs was merely a fact witness, whose testimony helped Adams win her case. Secretary Hobbs was not a defendant in Adams’s lawsuits and she bears no liability. That person is then-Senate President – now Representative – Andy Biggs. Secretary Hobbs did not set your pay, nor your conditions of employment, nor the procedures to hire and fire staff: the Senate President at the time had complete and sole control of all that. The court found there was a lack of sufficient procedure in place to document and escalate the causes that led to your termination, not that Secretary Hobbs intended to retaliate by firing you. Secretary Hobbs took responsibility for her part in firing you – for cause – but she had no intent to retaliate against you. The courts have established that your pay was sexually discriminatory and you were wrongly terminated, and the jury has done what they could to rectify that wrong.īut you are making an error: Katie Hobbs did not discriminate against you, and is not the cause of the injustice that was done to you.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |