Things suddenly and inexplicably turned dark for the Pants, as can easily happen in the toxic environment that currently exists at UAB. From the lawsuit:
On February 8, 2008, the Pants were called into a meeting with eight to nine UAB officials. At the meeting, the UAB officials asked questions about their fax, phone, and e-mail usage. They were frightened, confused, and overwhelmed by those questions because they were not informed of the purpose or reasons behind them.
After the meeting, the Pants were handed letters stating that they were being placed on administrative leave. The letters were handed to them immediately, leading them to believe that they had been prepared in advance of the meeting.
The letters stated that they were being placed on administrative leave without pay for possible violations of UAB policies.
At that point, they were escorted out of the office by UAB police detectives.
That sounds eerily familiar to your humble blogger. I, too, was called into such a meeting without warning. I was questioned repeatedly about my blog for probably 45 minutes to an hour, even though UAB now claims my termination had nothing to do with my blog. I, too, was placed on administrative leave and given a letter that had been prepared in advance. I was not allowed to return to my desk to gather my personal belongings, although I was not escorted out by UAB police. According to an affidavit from a UAB official in my lawsuit, however, police were called to stand outside the door during one meeting with me.
And UAB wonders why I'm alleging gender discrimination. Do you think that would have been done for a meeting with a female employee?
The Pants' complaint makes it clear that, just as in my case, UAB's real concern had to do with matters outside of work:
Anita Bonasera, a UAB human resources employee, stated that she didn't care about the use of UAB's phones, fax, or e-mail, but that she was concerned that they may have been using UAB-paid consultants for their outside consulting work. They unequivocally denied it.
Interestingly, Anita Bonasera plays a starring role in our Legal Schnauzer story. She admitted to me in a tape-recorded conversation that I was targeted because of the content of my blog, especially about the Siegelman case. That issue is not in doubt, and you can hear a portion of the conversation here:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
