My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: Washington
I was recently terminated after many years in my job for the alleged acts of my supervisor who was accused of making disrespectful comments to his subordinates. Our company had a complaint line where a couple of employees colluded to get some workplace changes stopped that affected them. We ended up getting several statements from employees to support the supervisor and pretty well say what kind of guys these two were. We submitted those employee statements with our appeals. One of those complaints was a hispanic male claiming this supv was racist and this person had a history of making such claims when things weren't going his way and the other, an over weight fellow with health problems in his middle age who charged that the supv was making disrespectful complaints about his weight.
The other charge in our termination was 'resisting change' due to some changing of shifts that was being brought about and our supposed resistance, even though that resistance was based on potential safety risks affecting employees so I had asked that the change be postponed temporarily. I'd had a different supervisor years ago who had made a comment in a performance review that others had perceived me as resisting change at times when in fact, I was attempting to protect our business and just questioning things before they hit. That was an exemplary review and I highlighted the comment and submitted it as well with my appeal. I'd had NO warnings or reviews of any kind from this new supervisor of mine and instead, he took the word of one or two other new managers who are new to our business but apparently had a vested interest in the outcome. I would hope that this may be worth something on appeal where he never had personal observations to drive something like this because he'd spent so much time away for other reasons during this time.
Our appeal is being heard by an administrative law judge who as it turns out, speaks at Universities with one of our companies complaint investigators to Human Resource audiences. I see this as a conflict of interest and had thought about sending the internet link where this person was scheduled for an appearance for a seminar with the complaint investigator or just let this run it's course and see what happens and then perhaps, mention it. I don't want to offend anyone by questioning character and integrity but when I saw that, it appeared pretty apparent so I had toyed with the idea of just sending the link that mentions both by name and ask, "is this the same Joe Smith by chance"? and let it go at that.
Any thoughts are appreciated.
v

