Free Objection - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

ATTACHMENT B
Case 2:03—cv—02300-ROS D0cument103-3 Filed 07/14/2006 Page10f3

" AFGE Gr'e anc

Date: January 2, 2001
Subject: Prohibited Discrimination, Step 1 (Slaughter-Payne, M)
T0: Administrator, Mental Health &; Behavioral Science Services (MH&BSS)
Ms Slaughter-Payne is a respected member ofthe Black community of this Medical Center, a
vocal advocate for minority rights, a sought-alter adviser and representative for those engaged in the
pursuit of EEO complaints, a union representative, an active member ofthe local NAACP, and an organizer-
of job actions that have been embarrassment to this Center. Bluntly, and in short. she is a thorn in the side
of management of this lacility.
She has Bled several EEO complaints protesting discrimination against her. She was "1ired" as V
Chairman ofthe EEO Advisory Committee because she would not compromise her principles. She and her
husband have been threatened with undeserved disciplinary actions. She has been threatened with RIF
• This year the Medical Center abolished, without authority, the Compensated Work Therapy
Program although the Veterans Administrations plans call tor this program to be expcmded. This
action caused Ms. Slaughter-Payne’s job to be abolished. Only one other employee was similarly
€ aH`ected.
• On September 26, 2001, Ms. Slaughter-Payne received ajob offer of a GS-7 Human Resources
Assistant. This was reibsed not only because it caused a significant financial loss, but also
effectively ends her representational activities and signihcantly curtails her active community
involvement. Ms. Slaughter-Payne believa that this is the real motivation for this action. She
also belietm this was an "in your iace” offer with the intuition of insulting her and putting her in
her place.
• After that refirsal she was directed to perform unclassifted duties in Mmtal Health until "l-Inman
Resources decided what to do with me." ‘
• On December 4, 2001, Ms. Slaughter-Payne was assigned, involuntarily, to the position of ,
Employee Relations Specialist, GS·9, not GS-7, to be effective December 30, 2001. While the
attempts to cause her financial distress have been abandoned, this assignment will eifectively
curtail her undesirable activities.
• On December 19, 2001, Ms Slaughter-Payne received a letter hom the Administrator, MH&.BSS,
that she was using representational time for an employee not in the bargaining unit, allegedly on
the advise Ot-I‘{l.¤113D Resources. The ccnclusions acted on are directly and undisputedly contrary
to law and regulations. This lawtiil and necessary representational time was charged to leave
without pay, causingMs. Slaug,hter—Payne financial loss. The met that this action was taken two
days after an NAACP representative forceiiilly related his concerns about the treatment of Ms.
Slaughter—Payne to the Human Resourcm Odicer is not lost on Ms. Slaughter-Payne.
Ms. Slaughter-Payne believes that these actions were not taken for legitimate reasons, but in direct reprisal
Lv for her participation protected activities and because of her sex. and race. A11 persom involved in this
1 her are white and Ms. Slaughter-Payne believes they have reached their limits ‘
., ,,4 JAN ?_ EEGZ byu l\L‘D7··
Case 2:03—cv—02300-ROS Document 103-3 Filed 07/14/2006 Page Qyoi-QCHMENT B

" dealing with this ‘*uppity” female; they are concerned regarding her continued pro—employce, anti-
discrimination activities.
The inconsistent activities ofthe Agency and the obvious disregard tor law and regulations in their pursuit
of actions against Ms. Slaughter-Payne cause this Local to give credence to the charges of Ms. Slaug,htet··
Payne. Certainly the Agency cannot deny that they have wantonly and williitlly violated CFR 1614.605
and EEOC regulations at MD 110, Chapter 6, and did so with the intention of harm to Ms. Slaughter-
Payne. An oder of a GS-7and a directed assignment to a GS-9 position also speaks to the motivm of these
actions. Therefore, this grievance is tiled on behalf Ms. Slaughter-Payne. Actions taken against Ms.
Slaughter-Payne were done in violation ofthe following:
• CFR 1614
• 5 USC 2302(B)(I), (9)
• 5 USC 71
• EEOCRegttlations(MD 110, Chapteré)
• Master Agreement, Article 16, Section 1; Article 17, Section 1; Article 12, Section 10: Article 45,
Section 6C.
In redress for these violations, the following is requested;
• Ms. Slaughter-Payne shall be given an assignment consistent with goals of her choice in a tield of
her choice. Provide any training to alfect this assignment at Agency expense.
"" • In accordance with Agency regulations tor violation of Agency regulations, administer
disciplinary action at a level consistent with Table ot`Pena1t.les for the offensa ccmmitted.
• Compensatory damages of not less than $50,000 in redress for actions taken against Ms.
Slaughter-Payne.
Respectiiil Submitted,
Randy Brurtrm
President
v
Case 2:03—cv—02300-ROS Document 103-3 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02300-ROS

Document 103-3

Filed 07/14/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02300-ROS

Document 103-3

Filed 07/14/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02300-ROS

Document 103-3

Filed 07/14/2006

Page 3 of 3