QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Postal EEO Forum

^               13385-13400 of 13400  13369-13384 >>
13400
Linda
02-22-2019
05:37 PM ET (US)
I think it is a full 🌒
Edited 02-22-2019 05:38 PM
13399
VerleiPerson was signed in when posted
02-22-2019
05:29 PM ET (US)
m/13397....How can you see the speck in your brother's eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. Stop gossiping and spreading strife!
13398
Karina
02-22-2019
10:22 AM ET (US)
Your material is very appealing.

Feel free to surf to my web site
13397
RivkahPerson was signed in when posted
02-22-2019
08:06 AM ET (US)
PEA I just clicked on the injured forum on here by accident. There is a post from Jazzie about you. Honestly, she is sooo full of herself and way out of line. No wonder she posted on a thread that is nothing but scammers.
13396
RivkahPerson was signed in when posted
02-22-2019
07:57 AM ET (US)
More will be known when the AJ responds to the Motions that are currently being submitted by the po and all interested parties and the March 20 Status Conference is held.
13395
Monek JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
02-22-2019
07:02 AM ET (US)
I have a question how many more steps before we have exhausted the entire process before we get paid and how long can it take maybe 10 years to win the case and 10 years to get paid just asking what about reinstatement? To end further loss of income to members and lesson the back pay that is adding up? Does that make sense
13394
Postal Employee Advocate
02-21-2019
04:37 PM ET (US)
My comment regarding rejection of the speculation of the eventual costs a complainant would pay in the event a non-attorney was involved, was directed at the proposed scenario, and I explained why.
My comment regarding my bona fides was directed at a poster on the other side who has been exposing his/her profound ignorance by claiming that non-attorney representatives must be licensed. I must not have made that clear in my earlier comment.
13393
Former USPS InspectorPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
03:49 PM ET (US)
@Postal Employee Advocate, you "categorically reject the scenario just presented". So when you say "I get 1/3rd of any non-pecuniary compensatory damages, or emotional damages awarded to the complainant" does that persist by your "contract" through both a settlement or trail award/appeal paid out to the victim employee at/in the Federal District court process? If it does then my scenario does categorically represent you. I have NEVER and will not accuse you of "mis-handling the processing of a complaint" or "challenge my representation of a federal or Postal employee" until I have verified proof of which I do not and have no desire to attempt to confirm even had there been a credible allegation of such. In the event you feel I am the poster in "I suppose the poster who is challenging my credentials knows more than these other legal professionals" then I assure you I lack any knowledge of instances to support nor am I challenging your "credentials" issues. I am not aware that any non-attorney advocates/representatives requires a "credential" or competency test requirement to provide services outside specific DBAs in States the person works with regards to local/state rules (like tattoo artists, message therapists ect).

My suggestion is that victim employees think long and hard about the cost/benefit to proceeding with their EEOC case/claim in relation to using an attorney and/or non attorney. If a victim has a high loss value case/claim AND strongly believes there is enough proof to support the case/claim then pulling out TSP or home equity to afford a high dollar lawyer under the presumption/expectation their case/claim will proceed to a Federal District court trial/appeal is likely a wise choice in the long run to hire the attorney. If the victim can't afford a attorney and does not wish to represent themselves then a cheaper/reliable/communicable non attorney is their only option, so be it.

If a victim is facing getting only 20-40% of their award/settlement at the Federal District level then likely the emotional costs with the Federal/State tax responsibility assessed is not worth proceeding past the OFO reconsideration step.
13392
Postal Employee Advocate
02-21-2019
02:37 PM ET (US)
I categorically reject the scenario just presented relative to non-attorney representatives. There are a relatively modest number of non-attorney representatives available in the country for Postal and federal employees. They all have differing fees and payment agreements. The agreement with my clients is they pay me $ 100 per hour to perform all of the necessary procedural requirements to get through the administrative process; which includes litigation at hearings and appeals to OFO. It they win, they keep any back pay and/or benefits to which they were already entitled. I get 1/3rd of any non-pecuniary compensatory damages, or emotional damages awarded to the complainant. If, later on, they want to enter into another contract with an attorney who wants 1/3rd of everything to go to federal court, even their backpay and benefits, that’s up to them.
The real problem that no one is talking about is the lack of interest that most attorneys have in taking on the Postal Service in an administrative forum that is onerous, drags on for years, and is limited to awards of $ 300,000 or less. However, if you locate an experienced non-attorney representative willing to guide the employee through this difficult process, you are placing yourself at risk of what? Malpractice?
I can assure you that I have never been accused of mis-handling the processing of a complaint, and have provided guidance to other legal professionals and attorneys on the nuances of this process. I have never had an attorney, an administrative judge, or the Commissioner of the EEOC or Chairman of the MSPB object or challenge my representation of a federal or Postal employee. I’ve even been involved in cases where the Postal Service assigned two of their staff attorneys as co-counsel, and I was the only opposing representative. I suppose the poster who is challenging my credentials knows more than these other legal professionals.
13391
RivkahPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
02:33 PM ET (US)
Former PI As I recently found out the hard way, most employment law attorneys will not touch postal service discrimination cases and those that will require large retainers and high hourly fees. They will not work on contingency. In addition PEA does not touch back pay or benefits. His contingency is only on non pecuniary damages, so the $$ amounts you gave would not be the case.
13390
Former USPS InspectorPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
01:38 PM ET (US)
For clarification of my previous post I present an example. I retain a non attorney representative during the required EEOC "administrative remedy" process agreeing to a 30% contingency of either part/all of any actually/realized paid by the Agency award/settlement. The Agency refuses to a reasonable settlement and my case/claim heads to the EEOC AJ/OFO for a decision. The EEOC OFO decision is either in my favor in whole or part BUT I am not happy with the EEOC OFO award or the OFO pulls a Bullock v EEOC decision saying "yes" I was discriminated against but since the EEOC OFO believes (even absent any medical evidence I support) that I was and have always been "unable to perform the essential elements of the job" (as the EEOC OFO did to their own AJ) so I am not entitled to back pay, reinstatement but only some small amount of pain/suffering award. I file a Federal district court case having to agree to 30% contingency with a new attorney that will either work with or not my non attorney representative but likely I will desire/demand they both work together. My case/claim either gets settled by the agency or goes to trial and I am awarded $1 million. Given that scenario I would get 40% or $400k (give or take depending on settlement vs trial) BUT had I retained an attorney instead of a representative from the start I would get 70% or $700k.
13389
Former USPS InspectorPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
12:49 PM ET (US)
Like anything in life there are pros and cons. When contemplating filing/proceeding in an EEOC case/claim it may be best to count and expect your case/claim to be headed to a jury/judge trial in Federal District court. If the claim/case is resolved prior to that jury/judge Federal district court trial then GREAT. If not then best to proceed through the "administrative remedy" process in front of the EEOC as best you can afford financially and emotionally/physically. If at the beginning of the "administrative remedy" process requirement stage in front of the EEOC a victim employee elects to be represented by an non-attorney representative expect having to hire a licensed attorney at some point if unable/willing to self represent oneself in Federal court. Many lead attorneys may or may not agree to allow a non attorney representative to sit "second chair" during the trial. I am not sure but expect non attorney representatives retain their "contractual" right to say 30% contingency (to some or all of an award/settlement) and the LEAD attorney will likely demand 33.1/3% - 50% contingency fee off the top leaving a victim with 20% - 40% of either a portion/all of their award/settlement when an non-attorney is utilized and the case/claim goes to a Federal district court trial/appeal. Again, all are best served to proceed under the expectation their case/claim is headed for Federal District court. Any decision how to proceed is a roll of the dice and thus has consequences in the decision that is made by the victim.
13388
RivkahPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
12:32 PM ET (US)
jjmv Jazzie has been spreading false information on PEN for a long time. She/he never backs it up with fact or legitimate references. Usually anyone who calls them out on it is verbally attacked and called a hater. I have been a recipient on numerous occasions.
13387
jjmvPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
12:22 PM ET (US)
Thanks everyone for that information that’s relief to know the truth
13386
RivkahPerson was signed in when posted
02-21-2019
12:12 PM ET (US)
Thanks J.R. You've probably noticed deleted by author posts on here recently. One a few minutes ago. Most likely Jazzie.
13385
Postal Employee Advocate
02-21-2019
12:04 PM ET (US)
 1614.605 Representation and official time.

(a) At any stage in the processing of a complaint, including the counseling stage  1614.105, the complainant shall have the right to be accompanied, represented, and advised by a representative of complainant's choice.
^               13385-13400 of 13400  13369-13384 >>