RWP process is a "CLM" (Career Limiting Move)

My former Supervisor, Desrochers (whose harassment charges now numbered at the minimum--four) was passed over to another department; in much the same way teachers don't fail a student anymore, just make them someone else's problem. On my return to work after a 3.5 week stress leave, I handed a Respectful Workplace (RWP) complaint dated April 30, 2008 to my new Supervisor, Chief Operating Officer of OSD, Anna Schmidt Beauchamp.

Self-preservation 101 :

Never fire a manager  who knows where all the bodies are buried; it will likely lead to whistling about it.

The assigned investigator to the RWP complaint, was Ginette Grimard. Her notes accessed in 2011 supports my position that I expressed no malice in bringing forward a complaint but did so in good faith that it would lead to positive change. I expressed empathy for my Supervisor stating the harassment was likely due in part to the stress of the staff shortages and unrelenting and increasing workload. I had spent several unpaid hours at home compiling reports as a pro-active response, with the understanding that the decision was ultimately theirs. I had plans to move on and had a few good solid leads for new employment and it was clear that I was focused at the meeting on my needs, that included:

Self-preservation for Bipolar 301  

• ensure any future employment references would be fair and truthful;
• advise of an ongoing medical condition protected under the Human Rights Code;
• advise of accommodation required being a reasonable workload and a respectful workplace;
• ensure my 3.5 weeks stress leave would not adversely affect future employment opportunities;
• advise employer of medical history and of ongoing past hospitalizations for a full understanding that accommodation was essential to maintaining and sustaining recovery; and at serious risk of permanent institutionalization should 'it get really bad'. 

Feeling Grimard had a good grasp of the situation and feeling good about their meeting together, I sent off the following email (excerpt below) elated at having an impartial investigator to conduct the investigation. Unbeknownst to me, that would be the first and last meeting. Excerpt of email sent from home June 2, 2008 4:16 PM to Grimard:

Hi Ginette,

Thank you for the time you spent with Anna and myself today. I appreciated the fact that although we had only anticipated an hour. you did not rush through the information and showed a sincere interest in understanding the situation.

I am confident that this time will have been well spent and positive changes will result from it.

Mille fois rnerci, ("A thousand thanks")                   Marielle

• This email was forwarded to the Labour Board on December 6, 2008 in defence of the accusation made in the Reply by Beauchamp that I was screaming and yelling (at her and Grimard) throughout the duration of the June 2 meeting. I explained to the Board, the email is "indicative of how I conducted myself at the RWP meeting (June 2nd) and what I strive for daily."  The Labour Board did not accept the document and returned the correspondence to me. 

Grimard's handwritten notes accessed in 2011 ended with the last page in mid-sentence with no concluding notes, but nonetheless, even this is evidence that refutes what was stated in Flintoft's Assessment.  With all other interviews the testimony is typed up into a report, so it is then incredible that CSC did not provide a typed up report from Grimard as to my interview. According to Grimard's verbal testimony in 2010 (MHRC investigative meeting) the MHRC reports includes the statement that Grimard had instructed Beauchamp Schmidt to proceed to accommodation at the conclusion of our RWP meeting. Did CSC destroy Grimard's report? What happened here is anyone's guess but ultimately speaks of  'cover-up'.  How about perjury? At the very least --Bullish?  

The situation turned from someone who felt "kicked like a dog' by one supervisor, to being 'a deer caught in the headlights'  by those desperate to protect the government's status quo.  I had no clue of the real danger I was up against; having grown up in an era that you trust people in authority to do what's right.

Evidence of a smear campaign (by way of notes accessed in 2011) shows numerous meetings held after I had already left OSD. Outrageous accusations to support the 'screaming' and 'yelling' smears stating dates, times and meetings that this was occurring with OSD staff and management. And yet each accusation can be easily dismissed. Like one VISA statement would show that on a couple of those occasions describing me as 'out of my mind', I was actually out of the country cheering on the Celtics at an NBA game in Minneapolis.

Upon receipt of the RWP findings in September 2008, I left Grimard several messages by email and phone requesting an opportunity to meet.  I received no acknowledgement or response.  File accessed 2011 showed that Grimard did seek advice from Government as to how she should respond to me. 'No response' speaks volumes to a person who suffers from manic depression.

Manitoba Ombudsman Investigator Bob Baker responded he saw nothing wrong with Beauchamp Schmidt conducting the RWP investigation (an assessment made after being apprised of Beauchamp's FIPPA violations, HRC violations, perjury, criminal acts) on the basis that I had initially handed the complaint to Beauchamp.  Baker also stated that it is appropriate for CSC to investigate its own complaints which is in contradiction to CSC's earlier promise that an 'outside department' would be conducting an unbiased, off-site and impartial investigation. 

Cover letter to Manitoba Labour Board dated November 24, 2008 requesting to respectfully address the inconsistencies in the Government's Reply to LRA application went unacknowledged by both MLB and Government. The following email is once again indicative of my respectful and professional approach despite the mistreatment I was receiving:

The information is provided in good faith and with respect for the Government of Manitoba, as it is my genuine desire to resolve the conflict peacefully. Mediation cannot begin until a meaningful exchange of perceptions is conducted. I believe the Respondents are in agreement with me that there can only be a win/win resolution and that can only be done in a climate of mutual support and respect.

Crazy is as crazy does! Mama always says 'You can't outgrow crazy."