My response to the accusation

The accusation was unfunded, fabricated

Carolyn’s accusation of hostile workplace/sexual harassment (more precisely offensive language and sexist comments) was very shocking to me, since she never communicated to me in any way that my language towards her was unwelcome. Moreover, no one from our work environment ever communicated to me that they would have knowledge of any situation where Carolyn would have felt that my language towards her was offensive to her. The first time I learned about Carolyn’s concerns about my language towards her was the morning of August 14, 2008, during my interview with LaRee Kinney, who was conducting the investigation on behalf of ADP Total Source (HR contractor). I have to ask why Carolyn Martinez never addressed these issues before, since she was my supervisor and technically she could have taken actions against me. Why did she wait one month after the last alleged incident took place to file her complaint, or to take any other action? The HR didn't have any precedent related to this accusation before the 7th of August (the day I was formally accused), according to what Kathi Safford (HR) told me on a phone conversation on the 8th of August. The accusation doesn’t refer to violent behavior that could harm Carolyn physically or psychologically. Why not try to dissipate any eventual misunderstanding before proceeding with such a serious allegation? I was the most experienced person in the lab, then why this urge to separate me from the company at a very crucial moment, when the administration was emphasizing the importance of the Applications lab. I was never allowed to enter Raydiance's building since the day I was formally accused, not even to recuperate my belongings (they were sent to me by mail).

The procedures followed by Mike Armas and Kathi Safford (HR) present serious problems

The way the accusation was handled by the administration and the HR is also very puzzling to me. Mike Armas handed me the harassment accusation notice without any precedent. He sent me home immediately after this fact, even though, as later was revealed, the accusation was not based on any alleged violent or pervasive behavior. Moreover, the accusation notice was only signed by Mike Armas, on the same morning he handed it to me (see Accusation.jpg). On this morning Kathi Safford (HR) was not even in the building, and obviously she was not present at the meeting during which I received the accusation notice. Again, I don't understand the urgency to act; in serious situations the HR is normally directly involved. Kathi Safford told me on the 8th of August 2008 that she received the first formal notice about this case on the morning of August 7, 2008, the same day Mike Armas handed me the accusation notice. I asked Kathi Safford on the 8th of August 2008 if she had heard something related to the accusation in any informal way before August 7th. Her answer was that she had heard something the week before, but that she didn't recall exactly the day, because she didn’t record the event (the conversation was witnessed by two other persons). The same day of August 8, 2008, during the same conversation with Kathi, she told me that during the investigation she will also take into consideration other accusations that came from Carolyn Martinez and Mike Armas, related to my work performance. She was trying to broaden the case, as my attorney later put it, which in my opinion signals that they acknowledged the weakness of their case.

Kathi Safford was very hard to reach and uncooperative the days following the accusation, despite the severity of my case. Raydiance didn't provide me any specific information about the accusation. I learned the name of the accuser, Carolyn Martinez, 5 days later, during my interview with LaRee Kinney (working for ADP Total Source a HR contractor for Raydiance) on August 13, 2008.

A sign of malice

The day before Mike Armas handed me the accusation he convoked me in a meeting that was supposed to take place on August 07 at 11:30AM. Carolyn Martinez was also invited. He called this meeting "The Future" and the location was the HR office (Kathi Safford's office). The next day Mike Armas called me into the HR office at 10:46AM and he handed me the accusation notice. Carolyn Martinez was not present. What was Mike Armas trying to communicate by choosing the name for the meeting "The Future"? See the attached The Future meeting.pdf file. Is this appropriate for a VP, when dealing with such a serious accusation? Mike Armas can now say that this meeting that he set-up on the evening of August 6th, which he called "The Future", and the meeting that actually took place on the 7th at 10:46, when he handed me the accusation notice, are two separate things. This is hard to believe because the same Mike Armas used the same name, "The Future" for a meeting two months earlier, in a similar case (the person involved can testify).

If we also take into consideration the history of my work relation with Carolyn Martinez and Mike Armas, I can only say that we are facing here a textbook case of malicious accusation and of retaliation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* Contact me for elements of evidence. Cut and paste the context from the text above in order to identify the piece of evidence you are looking for. Everything I wrote here can be substantiated by written documents or supported by a witness.