Jump to content

[Accepted] Sasha Kaiser - 10/07/2466 - Appeal


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Appealing Personnel:
Sasha Kaiser

Specific Incident:
Here and Here

Action taken as a result:
1.) One-Month Return to Parent Corporation as a standard employee.

2.) Mandatory Classes, consisting of 'Proper Workplace Procedure with Subordinates,' 'How to Behave in an SCC Workspace,' 'SCC and You: Representing the Chainlink as a Supervisor,' and 'Anger Management: Behaving Professionally in the Workspace.' to be listed on Employment, Medical, and Security records.

3.) A permanent mark on the CCIA record that states further action of this caliber will be met with more harsh punitive action.

Action contested:
All of the above

Reasoning for contest:
I, Sasha Kaiser, formally submit an appeal to the internal office of the SCC in contest of the ruling above. While the punishment has been carried out, I do not believe a proper investigation was conducted nor do I believe I was given appropriate opportunity to testify. The allegations paint myself as an incompetent leader who would go so far as to have an employee arrested for "disagreeing or arguing" with me, an assessment skewed far beyond what truly happened. For these accusations to have stood, my testimony was either ignored or lost in translation; that is to say, they are entirely untrue.

On top of this, I question the decision to punish senior staff for enforcing expectations on productivity in the workplace, particularly something as simple as status reports and long term projects. I do not expect the bare minimum of my staff, I do not allow laziness to be rewarded, and I do not permit unsafe workplace practices. I oppose the idea that one could be excluded from these basic expectations as per the terms of their 'contract' and that questioning this constitutes a valid reasoning for demotion. 

I contest the execution and rationale of the investigation as a whole, and request it to be re-opened, re-evaluated, and should the office agree with my assessments: scrubbed from my record.
 

Additional notes: 
(OOC: I spoke with Bear extensively about this, and it came down to an OOC staff complaint or an IC appeal. I genuinely do not think the notes for this case make any sense and are at best disingenuous, twisted far beyond the actual events into something clearly meant to justify a much harsher punishment than reasonable. Obviously I do not know how these decisions were reached though, so in the spirit of giving the benefit of a doubt, I file an appeal.)

Edited by Brayce
Removed information I did not know ICly, whoops!
  • Like 4
  • Brayce changed the title to [Accepted] Sasha Kaiser - 10/07/2466 - Appeal
  • Brayce locked this topic
Posted

TO: Sasha Kaiser, Research Director , SCCV Horizon
FROM: Human Resources, AMS, SCCV Horizon
SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report
--------------------

BODY:

The appeal review for the actions recorded against Sasha Kaiser have been completed. 

Upon reviewing the records and provided evidence in the noted Incident Reports we found that the conclusion from those original reports to be ultimately substantiated. The evidence showed that the emerging patterns of behavior were indeed in need of correcting. During the course of the Review, however it was found that previous communication as to the specifics of the prohibitive behavior was not conveyed in a clear and direct manner. 

 The following actions are applied at this time:

  • Rewording and clarification of the exact cause for actions taken in conclusion of noted Incident Report.


--------------------
DTG: 21-01:10-TAU CETI STANDARD-01-2467
SIGN: AMS

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...