Replies

It's well worth noting that the "dispute" arose out of the Postmaster's application of postal regulations. The disciplinary action (of which she complains) appears to have occurred directly as a consequence of complaints made to this Williams guy by customers who were directed to follow the rules by paying rent on time or (presumably) lose their post office boxes.

A criminal case can be developed against Williams and several of these customers for conspiring to deprive the US Government of lawful fees for services.

I probably know the Postal attorney who found herself defending this crap in court ~ she should seek new employment because this is NOT a personnel situation but a criminal situation calling for involvement of the Postal Inspection Service.

I had to put up with this crap from postal lawyers for 38 years ~ don't get me wrong, there are some good people there, but almost to a man, or woman, they will bow down and kiss the buttocks of virtually any personnel executive.

We once had a fire at USPS Headquarters (circa 1983). It burned out Personnel and the Law Department.

Except for the inconvenience to everyone else, the general agreement was that it couldn't have happened to a more deserving group.

They have not gotten better!~

The postmaster had every right to sue based on an unsafe working environment or threats to her person for carrying out the functions of her job, even if she was letter-of-the-law asinine about doing it.

However, in reading the case, these issues were appentages and the playing of the race card was central. There is simply not enough written to conclude that this was her idea or the idea of her counsel.

Nor is there any supporting evidence other than her allegations to conclude the threats actually took place. The local media "commented" about her accent. If this can be considered a threat, then the fact that I find Tony Blair's accent different from, say, John Bolton's could be considered I'm bigoted against Englishmen.