Posts: 218
Threads: 10
Joined: Dec 2005
"mermaid53: Posted - 07/23/2015
...What intelligent people in their right minds while serving on a board, make any kind of decisions based on "hearsay information that was not true" as you claim?..."
Running back over the sequence of events last year:
(1) The Board was installed on 30 June.
(2) I was told last summer by one of the four former office staff (and not Kahunascott) that, between that date and the terminations on 18 July, the only Board member who visited the HPPOA office was the Vice President, accompanied by Susan Escobar - who met with the staff and discussed office procedures. Not one Board member examined any files (personnel, financial, etc.) before the employees were terminated.
In the letter posted on the HPPOA website in January 2015, the former President, Ms.Mullenix, referring to the terminations, asserted that the Board had to act fast to protect the Association's assets. If no Board member had examined the files, how did the Board know the assets were in danger?
Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
Quote by Janet:
(2) I was told last summer by one of the four former office staff (and not Kahunascott) that, between that date and the terminations on 18 July, the only Board member who visited the HPPOA office was the Vice President, accompanied by Susan Escobar - who met with the staff and discussed office procedures. Not one Board member examined any files (personnel, financial, etc.) before the employees were terminated.
_____________________________________
This one action alone speaks volumes on who the instigator is about a lot of drama that continues today, and BJ's not around to blame for all of it.
I was stunned when I heard this story and a big red flag went up for me. The treasurer was out of town for several weeks during this time so there's her solid proof. I know the Secretary was out of the loop.
Regarding protecting HPP property....There are known events across the country of disgruntled employees destroying files before exiting the door after terminations. Don't know if "they" based it on known incidents???? Who's to say? Only a few of them know the answer to that question.
A year of this is pretty frustrating and there's no accountability through enforcement by the board when these things occur. It's the board's duty to do something or they're just as culpable.
Posts: 218
Threads: 10
Joined: Dec 2005
I'm sorry, mermaid, I don't understand your contention:
"This one action alone speaks volumes on who the instigator is about a lot of drama that continues today,..."
It is incumbent on all new Board members to learn about the situation of the Association and its operations immediately upon taking office (due to Hawaii's confidentiality laws, non-Board members cannot have access to the Association's confidential files). Then decisions about future strategy can be made on an informed basis. VP Maynard's visit to the office to learn procedures - while only partially moving in that direction - seems commendable. How does that translate into instigating drama?
The fact that no Board members attempted to learn about the Association before taking any action indicates very strongly that last year's new Board members had made up their minds about the Association's situation before taking office. I ask again: On what information did they form those opinions and where did they get that information? Kahunascott's assertion that they relied on hearsay is becoming more credible.
On your other point:
"Regarding protecting HPP property....There are known events across the country of disgruntled employees destroying files before exiting the door after terminations."
If that was the fear that motivated the Board's action last year, the Board members, either together or in shifts, should have been in that office continually from the start of business on July 1, examining and cataloguing the files in question. That would have protected the files until such time as the Board could legally terminate the employees.
Apart from that, I've been in business for over 40 years and this is the first time I have heard of files being listed among an entity's "assets". Ms. Mullenix, in her letter of last January, implied that it was tangible assets that were in danger.
Posts: 143
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2014
Here's another fact concerning Mermaid's contention. The TE's did not know they were going to be fired and therefore had no reason to remove any files before the action. We all know that some of the Directors have made disparaging remarks in public about the TE's taking files from the office (hence, a very good reason for a lawsuit) however, how could they have? The morning of the massacre, I mean firing, how many people were in the office to witness it? I've been told that the TE's couldn't even remove some of their private property and other personal effects before they were escorted out the door.
Posts: 173
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2014
quote:
Originally posted by mermaid53
Quote by Janet:
(2) I was told last summer by one of the four former office staff (and not Kahunascott) that, between that date and the terminations on 18 July, the only Board member who visited the HPPOA office was the Vice President, accompanied by Susan Escobar - who met with the staff and discussed office procedures. Not one Board member examined any files (personnel, financial, etc.) before the employees were terminated.
_____________________________________
This one action alone speaks volumes on who the instigator is about a lot of drama that continues today, and BJ's not around to blame for all of it.
I was stunned when I heard this story and a big red flag went up for me. The treasurer was out of town for several weeks during this time so there's her solid proof. I know the Secretary was out of the loop.
I know for a fact she was in the loop regarding the termination. I was told by an existing director that she was in favor of the terminations. After all she is the prime co defendant that defamed the TE's in at least 2 meetings all captured on video.
I can't wait to see their faces when they say "I didn't say that",then play the recording for them.
Regarding protecting HPP property....There are known events across the country of disgruntled employees destroying files before exiting the door after terminations. Don't know if "they" based it on known incidents???? Who's to say? Only a few of them know the answer to that question.
A year of this is pretty frustrating and there's no accountability through enforcement by the board when these things occur. It's the board's duty to do something or they're just as culpable.
Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
All I can say is there are people getting thrown under the bus. I guess that's to be expected in a law suit.
Janet, it's your prerogative to commend all you want about that visit to the office. IMO, there's more to that than meets the eye.
There's a difference between someone who instigates and plans an action vs those who are followers.... 1st degree, 2nd degree...
Maybe someone wanted to wipe the slate clean and kept going...a policy disappeared off the website w/out board approval, rewrite all the office positions w/out board approval, redesign our website w/out board approval, and there's more...
Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
[quote]Originally posted by hppwatchdog
I know for a fact she was in the loop regarding the termination. I was told by an existing director that she was in favor of the terminations. After all she is the prime co defendant that defamed the TE's in at least 2 meetings all captured on video.
I can't wait to see their faces when they say "I didn't say that",then play the recording for them.
__________________
How can you be so sure this existing director isn't lying? And why would a current director be speaking with you any ways?
Posts: 218
Threads: 10
Joined: Dec 2005
mermaid:
What you say about "hidden" agendas/actions is absolutely correct. Some of what may come out of the lawsuit by the terminated employees may shed light on that and put the membership of the Association in a better position to take action against those who did/do not have the best interests of HPPOA at heart.
Where I disagree with you is the "difference between someone who instigates and plans an action vs those who are followers." Anyone who follows along with an illegal action is equally culpable under law and in the eyes of those who behave within the constrictions. As I've said, and you seem to agree, "no one held a gun to their heads". That is why Hawaii has laws to protect whistleblowers.
How could a director who examined the Bylaws not know that the process used to terminate the employees was flawed? Why would such a Director not insist that the process be corrected immediately (easily done with a legitimately constituted emergency special board meeting) - and worse, make an attempt to justify that action in a public meeting? Such a public display made that Director a willing participant in the original disputed action and set the Association up for the most financially damaging aspects of the lawsuit (if found guilty) - that of defamation of and placing the former employees in false light.
There was no need to justify that Board's opinion that the employees had to be terminated - they were all "at will" employees and could legally be fired for no reason. The crying shame here is that all the Board had to say was "it was time for a change".
Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
Even the law recognizes and punishes the mastermind more harshly than the followers, so there are varying degrees of culpability. That's all I'm saying.
Lack of experience and knowledge; unwillingness to fact check information before proceeding too quickly on many actions; unwillingness to learn from more experienced board or committee members. Viewing them as threats to their agenda and retaliation would follow; total disregard of certain individuals to follow rules; arrogance; followers who thought and think they are following leaders that had checked their facts. The perfect storm. All of this and more contribute to what we've been observing from day 1. The pattern is the same today.
Bylaw followers who stand up become victims of harassment. You were told that board members were being targeted but it's actually the other way around. Despicable behavior and not in the best interest of HPP. This fractures our community even further.
Considering all this, you think that certain board members would've actually listened to what anyone else had to say before the terminations? They had their own agenda from the get go and now they're throwing others under the bus.
Posts: 151
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2014
This is a civil lawsuit. There are no criminal charges.
|
