Comments for hrwhiz.com

Comment on Welcome by richard davidson

richard davidson — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:36:39 +0000

To those who share the concept of equality. Comments on the EEOC vs CRST by Laura Beck,E. Kuly, Bonnie,Janet Siders, Harry Mann and numerous others of EEOC so-called investigative tactics. Any person can file suit to reverse an EEOC determination as seen in CRST. What is not discussed when EEOC commits to paper “BASED UPON ITS INVESTIGATION” and where one or more individuals were not investigated is called pre-determined judgement, its not fair and may be in violation of Federal criminal law title 18 sec. 1001. EEOC does not disclose matters of apparent violation of criminal statutes are expeditiously reported to the Attorney General 28USC sec.535. EEOC appears to have disdain for the laws and what looks like MIKE R. says, February 22, 2010 and others there appears validity EEOC is in violation of criminal laws. It’s the United States Attorney to authorize investigation and to prosecute those at EEOC that deprive equal treatment under the law, not state, or district courts
MORE INFO make your comment

Comment on Sue Happy by HR Whiz

HR Whiz — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 02:05:31 +0000

Thanks for visiting and for the comment, Richard.

Comment on The Defense Attorney by Point of No Return « hrwhiz.com

Point of No Return « hrwhiz.com — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 02:04:22 +0000

[...] of No Return “The Defense Attorney” was a post I used in part to complain about the ridiculous BWC hearing process in our state. [...]

Comment on Sue Happy by richard davidson

richard davidson — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 23:47:06 +0000

Accusing EEOC attorney: This is not about labor or employment law. It is about Federal criminal law and where EEOC crossed the line. District or Circuit court IS NOT the purview to comment on Title 18 criminal statutes. It’s the job of the United States Attorney or Attorney General. Why did the truck company win $4.5 million?
EEOC has a mandatory obligation to disclose violation of title 18 to the Attorney General see 28 USC sec. 535. What EEOC apparently did see press release 4th para: February 9, 2010 order and opinion…WITHOUT FIRST CONDUCTING A PROPER INVESTIGATION REQUIRED BY LAW is the opposite of EEOC based its suit on an investigation of information provided established a violation of the statutes. What is going on: Title 18 sec. 1001 fraud and false statements. When EEOC committed to a government document an investigation that appears fabriciated is seen as a false document. Again the District or Circuit court do not comment on Title 18 statutes. What the court determined no proper investigation took place. There is another element the court statement “The EEOC’s failure to investigate” has the perception of predetermined judgement and is not fair. This brings on the added apperance of bias and can be construed as discriminatory. For documents reply by email.

Comment on Beating the Unemployment Maze – Part I by Calling Unemployment « hrwhiz.com

Calling Unemployment « hrwhiz.com — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:59:27 +0000

[...] I started thinking about it. This blog was kind of new when I wrote “Beating the Unemployment Maze – Part I” last August. I’d encourage you to read [...]

Comment on TPA’s 101 – Part I by TPA’s 101 – Part II « hrwhiz.com

TPA’s 101 – Part II « hrwhiz.com — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:54:51 +0000

[...] 101 – Part II In my previous post, TPA’s 101 – Part I, I discussed why you should hire a TPA to help you with your worker’s compensation plans. But [...]

Comment on Beating the Unemployment Maze – Part I by Debbie

Debbie — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:12:47 +0000

Interesting post. Not too many people can say what you can about hearings. I’d like to learn more.