Fired, and I still don't know why. . .

[silverstaff]

Definitely call, squeaky wheel gets the grease

Just called. Got her desk, call went to voice mail and left a message. Guess she's out of the office, which would at least explain why I hadn't heard anything.

[silverstaff]

. . .and just got a callback. Attorney at the State Gov's HR office has agreed to all the terms of the agreement, no problems, there is just a procedural disagreement between the lawyers on how to word one single clause, relating to asking the Personnel Board to drop the pending action so it doesn't go on the record. They are arguing over if that can that even be in the agreement that I agree to drop the complaint, or can it instead just be that both parties recommend to drop it, basically figuring out how to best word the part of the settlement that tries to keep it all off the books.

You'd think that it would be a pretty boilerplate thing, but from the sounds of it, they don't have settlements like this very often. They usually settle before there's a recommended judgement (so it didn't get this far), so my situation is slightly unusual in that regard.

The positive takeaway is that everyone has agreed to all the basic terms: Nobody in any of the offices that has reviewed it has objected to me getting my job back, back pay, seniority, ect. Now they are just bickering over how to word one clause relating to keeping this whole mess from going on the record (which is a very lawyer thing to do I guess).

[eltf177]

Something for which your ex-boss had better be grateful for, something like this will mark him as poison for any other job anywhere!

[Becks]

This was epic.

[wordgirl]

Wow. I'd been following this sporadically but missed many of this year's updates. I'm so glad, silverstaff!

I wonder if it's too late to ask for one more condition: An apology. If not from the jerk who started this whole mess, then from the agency that let him get away with it.

[Argus]

I wonder if it's too late to ask for one more condition: An apology. If not from the jerk who started this whole mess, then from the agency that let him get away with it.

I think silverstaff's conversations with the agency directory are already pretty close to a verbal apology, and I think a written apology is unlikely given the terms of the settlement.

[eltf177]

I have to agree, the settlement shows they were wrong but any sort of an apology is unlikely at best...

[silverstaff]

Here's an update. . .about no update.

Three weeks ago today was the last time I heard from the attorney for the state, when she called me to say it needed just one last sign-off and would be ready to sign in a couple of days.

Two weeks ago today I called the attorney to check on what was going on and was told there was a dispute internally, over one single clause in the agreement, and that there was some shakeup in state government right now, but everything was on track.

That was 2 weeks ago.

The issue should be coming before the board for a final ruling again rather soon, since all we did was put it for a final ruling until the April board meeting to give us time to settle and drop the complaint.

If I don't hear something soon, then the board will convene and rule in my favor, and there won't be a settlement, and we'll see if they try to appeal it.

My wife wonders if they now want it to go on the record. . .so they can use the fact that it's on public record that my boss broke the law in ordering my termination to justify terminating or demoting him.

In any case, I'm rather nervous because I haven't heard any updates in a couple of weeks and am considering calling the attorney again, either later today or sometime tomorrow.

[eltf177]

I think you've waited long enough, time to light a fire under somebody...

[Sandman]

Maybe the state got word that the judgement and the settlement were the same, minus the publicity. They might be looking to get rid of your old boss and needed something huge to use.

[silverstaff]

Well, I called the attorney again, and I got an update.

The attorneys for the various offices and departments finally all agreed on the wording, they have a settlement agreement that every lawyer on their side agrees with.

They set up an appointment to take it to the Director to have him sign the document.

The Governor fired him the day before he was supposed to sign the papers.

We have a new Governor in our state. He's firing senior officials left and right, and he's replacing them with new ones. . .at his leisure. This is leaving gaps in various agencies and offices. He's not firing them pending the new appointee taking office, he's firing them effective immediately.

The person above the Director, over that entire division of state government and sitting on the Governor's cabinet, was just replaced too, but that person does have the legal authority to sign the document. So, the attorney is trying to set up an appointment with the new cabinet official to have them sign it in the absence of a Director. She said she hopes to have it ready to sign sometime no earlier than next Tuesday.

. . .if it wasn't for the retroactive pay clause that ensures I get retroactively paid for all this, I'd be a lot more pissed. I'm just making sure they aren't trying to back out.

[Chromatix]

Well, it's not the first lack of joined-up thinking I've heard of in government.

[Sandman]

Tick tick tick goes the clock. Will it be signed and filed before the bell tolls....

[silverstaff]

An update.

I got a call from the attorney for the state.

I have an appointment this afternoon to review and sign the papers.

. . .the state still hasn't signed them. Remember what I said about a shakeup in the state leadership? The position of Director is still vacant, and new cabinet official is apparently very busy and hard to get ahold of. The attorney is trying to get in to meet the official, explain the whole situation to them, and get them to sign the papers.

So, trying to expedite this, the attorney wants to get my signature, then try to get the new senior official to sign off on it, then get the signature from the HR office, rather than get their signatures and wait for me to come in and sign it the attorney is getting me to sign it while waiting on getting in to speak with senior leadership.

Seems like the attorney is getting as frustrated as I am with how long this is taking. . .probably at least in part because the pay for this is all retroactive, once the deal is signed (or the Board orders my reinstatement) I get paid retroactively for all this, meaning the longer they delay the bigger my settlement gets.

In any case, later today I'll be going to review and sign the document. We'll see if they threw in an NDA or not, and I'll have done what I can do to bring this to a conclusion.

[eltf177]

Best of luck, and please keep us updated!