Lawyers: Selfless or Narcissist ... What Do You Think?

Here's a great example of the difference between selfless people, those who go into the caring professions (veterinarians, nurses, social workers, etc.), and narcissists (the antonym of "selfless"), those who go into other professions, usually more prestigious and lucrative.  Can you say attorneys?  Sure you can!

I have seen literally hundreds of clients (I am a licensed psychotherapist) free of charge, "pro bono", hundreds, over the last 22 years, yet I have not and will not brag about it and would never think of mentioning it publicly except to highlight a poignant example, as I am here.

This particular lawyer, who I am sure is not an evil person and in-fact helped my wife get her attorney in her recent successful lawsuit, bragged about HIMSELF on Facebook yesterday (see referenced post below) about how he "waived" an amputees expenses "AND" ONLY CHARGED HIM HALF OF HIS NORMAL FEE ... ONLY HALF OF WHAT, $250 AN HOUR?  This poor man with only one leg had to pay just $125 an hour!

Here is his post:

"I am so humbled by the faith people put in me. I am also overwhelmed by the perspective my clients have despite facing the worst tragedies. I just settled a case today for a man who suffered a leg amputation when a car pulled in front of his motorcycle. Over the time I have been his lawyer, I never heard him complain ONCE about how he felt or how his entire life has been re-written. He was surely in pain, scared, frustrated -- but his attitude was always shockingly positive and upbeat. This client trusted me sight-unseen on the recommendation of a mutual friend. He lives half a country away, and could have picked any of the lawyers knocking on his door. But he chose me. His attitude and spirit prompted me--after our very first conversation--to waive his case expenses AND more than half of my usual attorney fee. So I am thankful to know this client, and I extend boundless appreciation to him  and our mutual friend who put us on the other's path."

When I think of pro bono, I think of the legal profession.  We always hear about attorneys who take pro bono cases for the poor or disabled right?  The problem with that is those cases are usually high-profile cases, the ones that make it on television, shows like 48 Hours, 60 Minutes, or one of other well known programs.  The others are usually during highly publicized trails like Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, or Robert Zimmerman to name a few recent examples.  Why is it that only these people get “pro bono” defense?  PUBLICITY, that is the reason, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars in FREE PUBLICITY … how altruistic those lawyers are!

This guy sees himself as a hero because he reduced his fee by half and ate the expenses, which normally do not add up to much or are highly inflated in the first place.  Here is a poor guy who lost his leg and probably cannot work, and the lawyer probably ended up with between $60,000 and $140,000 of the man’s money!  They probably settled out of court too, saving the attorney a hundred or more hours work while raking in the same (or more) than he would have if it had gone to trial.

Let me tell you a brief, "hypothetical", story.  A law firm takes on a case for national origin discrimination.  The big cheese, the guy the firm is named after makes only rare appearances, during the first meeting and when they go to mediation.  The rest of the time his “staff” works on the case only when they have time, rarely returning phone calls or emails from the victim because they are focused on bigger issues, other cases.  The entire firm spends minimal time, all the while telling the victim “you have a great case, we’re going to get you close to $500,000!”, which is a pittance compared to what she should receive for having her reputation ruined and losing her career.

As the trial date approaches, the lawyers realize that they have not done enough work, also called due diligence, and dropped the ball, so they ask for a five month extension from the court and it is granted.  Five additional months of stress for the victim and her family, needless stress because the law firm had higher priorities elsewhere.  Only then do the depositions begin, depositions that should have been happening months ago.  They have not even contacted the victim’s top witness yet and do not do so until she insists.  This is just a week before the mediation, which comes out of nowhere to the victim only a month before trail!

In the interim, the big honcho (he even wears a cowboy hat) is taking care of other cases and not even thinking about the victim’s case.  Now, finally, in the few months directly before the mediation and trial, his cronies (low-wage lawyers – compared to the honcho anyway) are finally spending some time on the case.  They probably spent no more than  50 to 60 hours total, and that is probably a stretch, on the case before the surprise mediation (an event the victim was told nothing about until last minute).

As they go into mediation, the honcho is finally there with his crisp brown Stetson, along with his two cronies.  The mediator comes in, a retired judge, and it is like “old times”, the honcho and mediator obviously knowing each other rather well.  The mediator admits that he knows little if anything about the case because he “just received it”, so the honcho starts laying out the victim’s case, a very complex case with hundreds of pages of evidence, over a just a fifteen minute period?  Honcho even forgets several extremely critical points and it is not his cronies that chime in to correct him, it is the victim’s husband!  And that is it, the judge says “got it” and scurries off to meet with the defense team across the hall.

The negotiations start off just below the figure mentioned above, but the numbers quickly drop as the mediator goes back and forth like a ping pong ball.  As time goes on, even though he knows little about the case, the mediator is making judgments, saying “you don’t have a very strong case” and “only 38% of plaintiffs are successful in Missouri”, and the victim’s attorney is agreeing with him!  What?  What happened to the great case the victim had?  Well, then it was time for lunch.

The honcho was gracious enough to offer to buy lunch for the victim and her husband at a French restaurant downstairs.  While the victim’s husband used the restroom, Honcho and his male crony ordered Maker’s Mark whisky on the rocks, in a glass the size of the Hulk’s fist, filled to the brim.  Must have been at least a triple shot!  Honcho’s wife, the other crony, ordered a glass of wine, so when the husband returned, Honcho said “we’re having one, you might as well order one too”, so he order a glass of wine   The victim does not drink and stuck with just water.  Less than half way into lunch, Honcho has already polished off his whisky, orders another, as did his sidekick, and here come two more tumblers full of alcohol.  There must have been AT LEAST 6 ounces in each glass, for a total of 12 ounces EACH over lunch…in less than an hour!

Things started heading downhill, to put it mildly, after lunch as the mediator became more negative and offensive and honcho getting more impatient with every minute, becoming hostile, raising his voice, and stomping out of the room at one point.

Looking back, it seems like a big production, a well rehearsed one at that, as honcho and his cronies started to insist the victim had a poor case and that she should think seriously about accepting an offer that was a fraction of the starting number.  They said “you’ll be lucky to get this much in court, if you can win at all”.  Wearing her and her husband down over several hours, which seemed to be the goal, honcho became enraged when the husband stated “I thought you said we had a good case, we were hoping that you would advocate for seeing this through to trial, we wanted to hear you say “let’s fight this and beat the bastards!’.”  At that point honcho stood up, cussed at the husband, saying “we’ll do whatever you want”, while his cronies kept pushing the victim harder and harder toward a settlement.

It all made sense now, “good cop, bad cop”, wear the subject down until they cannot take it any more, then go in for the kill!  Honcho and his cronies had everything to gain and nothing to lose by settling now.  They would receive 40% and much more than their hourly rate based on the small amount of work they had obviously put in, and would save themselves a great deal of work during the most intensive period, just before and during trial.  Win-win for the lawyers!

In the end, the victim received a little more than 10% of what she was told would be an equitable result, “making her whole”, an amount that would barely pay for a mid-priced car these days.  And that was supposed to make her whole after having lost a $65,000 a year job and a 20-year career?  I think the lawyers came out on top in this case, them and the mediator who charged thousands for a days’ work.

I would tell you about my personal experience with lawyers, an experience even less positive than this, but I will save that for another article, a book maybe.  All in all, I think Shakespeare was right when he wrote:

“
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.” - Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78

I do not mean that literally, but maybe the world would be a better place if there were not any in the first place.  Which brings me to the question: Selfless or narcissist?  Every lawyer I have ever met, with one exception out of hundreds were selfish, arrogant, narcissists.  Have you had a different experience?   I hope so.  If you have or have not, let me hear your opinion, about your experience with the legal profession.  

Key Words: lawyer, attorney, legal, court, mediation, case, trial, victim, plaintiff, defendant, defense, judge, narcissist, selfless, arrogant, viral, institutional, terrorism, InstitutionalTerrorism, CombatActivist

Copyright 2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved

ExpressScripts ... We Don't Care, We Don't Have To!

ExpressScripts is another government contractor out of control. We, Tricare beneficiaries, are forced to use this monopoly by Tricare and they could care less about customer service ... BOTH TRICARE AND EXPRESSSCRIPTS!

I needed 9 prescriptions filled prior to a 90 day business trip to Europe counseling military and their families, so I had receive needed medications prior to departure. I sent ExpressScripts the prescriptions via certified mail and they received them with 10 days to process, more than enough or so I thought.

I literally begged them to expedite my order and told them the consequences of deploying without my medications. I am 80% service-disabled and have two potentially life threatening conditions.

Rather than expediting my order, ExpressScripts sat on my prescriptions even after I called and emailed several times to help the expediting process.

Bottom line: They had more than enough time to process and ship my prescriptions, but it appeared obvious to me that they were deliberately stalling.

When a woman called me 3 days prior to my departure and "curtly" told me that I had to go to a local pharmacy and have them filled, I was beside myself. I begged her, again, to please process them, indicating that it would cost me much more to get them from a local pharmacy and that they still had plenty of time to fill and ship them overnight, BUT SHE RUDELY REFUSED IN A TONE OF VOICE I FOUND OFFENSIVE AND APPALLING! It was like a spoiled child saying "nanny, nanny, nanny ... I can do this just because I can".

In the end, I had to go to the local pharmacy and instead of it costing between $9 and $27, I PAID OVER $200!

That is not only horrible customer service, it is unethical in my opinion. ExpressScripts have us over a barrel and they abuse that power.  As Lily Tomlin used to say ... We're ExpressScripts, "we don't care, we don't have to!" ExpressScripts ... YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!

Copyright 2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved

Clean Green Lawn ... Do Not Let the Competent, Clean-Cut Facade Fool You!

Clean Green Lawn
102 NE 82nd Terrace
Kansas City, MO 64118
(816) 506-2790

http://www.cleangreenlawn.net

I hired Clean Green Lawn to do some mowing for me last year and, unlike most contractors and service providers in Kansas City, they seemed friendly, competent, hard working, and, above all dependable. Integrity in business ... WHAT A CONCEPT!

We have been disgusted by company after company after company that either does not care or is too lazy or unconcerned about doing what they promise to do. Whether it is showing up for an estimate appointment, actually providing an estimate after coming to the house and surveying the work required, or following through with other promises, there are few businesses around with the professionalism, the pride, the integrity we as paying customers deserve.  That is correct...WE DESERVE QUALITY CUSTOMER SERVICE FOR PAYING OUR HARD EARNED MONEY FOR A SERVICE OR PRODUCT...THAT SHOULD BE A GIVEN!

I thought I had finally found such a company in Clean Green, even going to the length of asking them to keep an eye on things and being "on call" for my wife during a recent extended consulting trip "in case of emergency".

Our lawn was in terrible shape after last summer's intense heat and drought, along with neglect by a housesitter who eventually abandoned our home (and animals) two weeks before my scheduled return.

I asked Clean Green's frontman Aaron to propose a seeding, fertilization, and weed control plan last fall.  The proposal was fair, so we started with seeding, $120 to verticut and seed about 1/4 acre.

When they arrived, the verticut machine they were using to prepare the ground for seeding appeared old and useless, because it was barely making a dent in the hard ground. I was not instructed to prep the yard or water prior to their arrival, so I asked if the shallow and, in some places, non-existent cuts in the ground would be enough to allow the seed to germinate.  I was ensured that it was and given an aggressive watering schedule, watering daily at first, then religiously every other day for two weeks for about an hour per zone (15 minutes more than instructed).

I asked Aaron what I could expect before winter and in the spring, so the owner pointed to the lawn across the street (which is quite thick, lush, and green) and said it should be fairly thick, something like that (pointing to the same lawn) "in a few weeks" and should grow in fully by May.

As spring sprung and March of this year (2013) came and went, our lawn looked as bad as it did, maybe worse, than it did BEFORE SEEDING LAST FALL!  All of our neighbors lawns were thick and green by mid-March, while ours looked like the surface of Mars.

I had sent an email to Aaron at Clean Green early in the New Year to double check on the spring fertilization, weed control, and mowing schedule. Being an 80%-disabled Veteran, I have difficulty mowing a portion of our lawn along a steep slope, approximately 1/8 of an acre, so I wanted to ensure everything was "good" for the Spring because I had lost a lucrative contract in January and knew that we might have to sell our beautiful home. I also wanted them to trim some bushes and get rid of the leaves that had accumulated over the winter, but never got the chance.

When I did not receive a reply by March and saw the state of our lawn compared to our neighbor's, I became anxious and sent Clean Green another email. Aaron apologized, stating that he "had not received my earlier email" (what if I had been away as was planned and my wife did in-fact have ah emergency?). I asked him why our yard looked so bad compared to other's and what he would do about it, stating that we were putting our home on the market and curb appeal, which was currently non-existent, WAS CRITICAL!

The answer I received was less than professional and not what I expected from a firm that seemed to be so reliable!  I was told that it was too late to do anything for this season and that they were "booked solid" anyway. Excuse me? What happened to the false promises of a "full, green lawn" not to mention our agreement to fertilize, apply weed control, and mow this season?  To paraphrase his response, he said "Sorry pal, we made no promises, so you're on your own".  He added "I'll refund your $120", which, compared to most of the thieves running businesses in the area, was gallant, but not what I was looking for. I pleaded with him to see if there was anything else he could do to help us sell our home, but I was declined ..."good luck bub!".

I just spent over $300 on equipment, seed, soil, fertilizer, and weed control, in addition to the $120 I paid Clean Green Lawn, bringing the total to close to $450 for a lawn that still looks absolutely horrible. On top of that, I pray that my back and knees hold out long enough to make the yard presentable in order to sell before the season is over and we, possibly, lose our home as so many have done since 2008.

BOTTOM LINE: If you need reasonable lawn mowing, Clean Green Lawn MIGHT BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT ... MAYBE NOT (IN OUR CASE). If you need anything more challenging done in your yard, I recommend you find someone else for the job. But then again, will you find a business with integrity, quality customer service, dependability, fair prices? I WISH YOU LUCK!

I will be posting more horror stories involving Kansas City businesses, services, and contractors as time allows because there are in-fact so many, I do not believe I have the time to address them all ... guess I will have to prioritize!  All reviews will be posted on those business's AngiesList accounts as well, but in my experience AngiesList is about as reliable as Clean Green Lawn, or Best Buy, or Ryan Lawn and Tree, or Verizon, or kMart ... etc. ... etc ... etc. ... You get the idea!

Title: Clean Green Lawn ... Do Not Let the Competent, Clean-Cut Facade Fool You!

Key Words: CombatActivist, fertilization, fertilizer, clean green lawn, landscaping, clean, Green, Institutional, InstitutionalTerrorism, kansas city, landscaping, Lawn, MO, mowing, seeding, Terrorism, yard, 64118, www.cleangreenlawn.net

Copyright 2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved

Best Buy or Big Lie ... You Decide

If you saw my video about Microsoft Windows, you know I was thinking about making a move to MAC ... I DID! That is through good news. Here is the bad ...

I had been researching Apple computers online when I decided to go to Best Buy to see them in person, u close and personal. As I approached the Apple display, a young salesman approached and asked if he could help. Almost immediately, another salesman approached with an Apple MacBook Pro 13 in his hands. That was the beginning of the end if my customer relationship with Best Buy.

I only started shopping at Best Buy again in 2008 after a 15-year hiatus for an "integrity" problem I had with a store in Colorado Springs, Colorado. After moving to Kansas City in 2008, I decided to give them another chance, spending several thousand dollars there over the last 5 years.

Back to the story. The salesman with this "new" computer told me it had a small blemish, but was a new computer and had been checked out internally, passing with flying colors.

Intrigued, I proceeded to ask specific questions about the computer. Remember, I only went to the store to look, not buy.  I ask hill specifically about the size of the hard-drive, telling him I needed a 500GB hard-drive for my business. He assured me that it was in-fact a "new" model with a 500GB hard-drive.

I have never purchased used or slightly used electronics before, except for deeply discounted floor models with a full warranty, which HE ASSURED ME WAS THE CASE with this particular computer. He added "it has a 1-year warranty, parts and labor. If you have a problem with it in the next 12 months, simply bring it back to the store".

I verified AT LEAST one more time with both salesmen present:

1. New computer? - "Yes!"

2. 500GB hard-drive? - "Absolutely, no doubt!"

3. Bring it BACK TO THE STORE if I have ANY PROBLEMS in the next year? - "Yes sir, bring it back and we'll take care of it!"

SOLD!  After all, these clean cut young men are not working on commission and have no reason to lie, so I left the store with my new Mac!

I noticed over the next several weeks that the battery did not seem to last as long as I had heard Apple batteries did, so I found the user manual online. The manual stated that this model's battery was supposed to last 10 hours, but mine was lasting only 2 hours or so.

As I was learning how to use this new operating system, I did some digging and found out that it only had a 250GB hard-drive (this as just a few weeks after I bought it), but because it seemed to be working well and still had plenty of space on the hard-drive, I decided to let the salesman's "little white lie" go ... BIG MISTAKE BECAUSE, AS I FOUND OUT TODAY, I WAS STILL WITHIN BEST BUY'S RETURN POLICY LIMITS AT THAT TIME.

A week or so ago, I unplugged the power charger, which was lit green at the time, meaning that the battery was fully charged, to use the computer while watching TV. When I unplugged the cord, the computer displayed a message saying something like "battery critically low - attach power". However, when I plugged the computer back in, the display indicated that the battery was "98%" charged!  I decided to check and see if the display was correct, so I unplugged the computer once more and IT WORKED ... 98% power, so I continued to use it remotely for an hour or so.

No problems until this morning, April 30th, 2013, only 50 days after my purchase AND WELL WITHIN THE ONE-YEAR "RETURN TO STORE" WARRANTY PERIOD. Again unplugged the (lit green ... battery fully charged) power cord, sat down, and tried to turn the computer on ... NOTHING, NADA, NIENTE!  I returned the computer to its power supply and after it finally came on, taking longer than usual, the battery indicator displayed only an "X", indicating that there was no charge in the battery. In-fact, when I checked the battery's status using one of the System Tools, the report indicated that the battery was 0% charged even though it had been plugged in overnight. The report also stated that there was "no battery detected" ... UH OH!

While I was digging through the system report, I saw the model number of the computer for the first time ... It read "MacBook Pro 13 - Model 2010 Mid-Year". WHAT? 2010? NOT 2012 OR 2013 AS I WAS TOLD?

That was the last straw! I backed-up my hard-drive, contacts, emails, and so on, gathered my receipts, and left for Best Buy to return my faulty, misrepresented computer that I had purchased less than 60 days prior. I should not have a problem, after all, I am well within the one-year Best Buy  warranty period ... right?  Wrong!

When I arrived at the store, I asked the man at the front door if I could please see a manager. After receiving the "third degree" as to why I needed to speak to a manager, Darnell Dixon, Customer Support Manager came strolling nonchalantly up, looking as if he was baffled as to why a customer would want to talk to a manager. It took all if the self-control I could muster, I calmly explained exactly what I just told you, every detail. I recorded the conversation as I do all conversations (telephone and otherwise) where there is a chance that the person on the other end could be confrontational or "less than totally honest". After all, Darnell's employees lied through their teeth to get me to buy this three year-old piece if junk, so why should I expect any less from him?  I was right, I should not have!

All Darnell could say is "you are outside of our return policy limits and need to deal with Apple". But Darnell, your employee lied to me, misrepresenting a product and your warranty limits, and you that is all you can do ... REALLY?  But all Darnell could say is "you are outside of our return policy limits and need to deal with Apple".  Come on Darnell, surely you have some authority to do the right thing and stand by your employees claims when he coerced me into buying this computer UNDER FALSE PRETENSES?  But all Darnell could say is "you are outside of our return policy limits and need to deal with Apple".

I asked Darnell Dixon, Customer Support Manager, fir his card and told him exactly what I thought of his integrity, or lack thereof, and that I would contact his corporate headquarters and, most likely, NEVER SPEND ANOTHER PENNY AT BEST BUY!  I probably threw a few other expletives in there as I walked out the door, BUT I WAS PISSED ... HOW DARE THEY LIE TO ME ... HOW DARE THEY!

When I returned home, I immediately called 888-BEST-BUY just as Darnell told me and was connected to Brittany in the Complaints Department. I explained the while story, very calmly, to Brittany, which seemed to be sympathetic and compassionate. After 15 minutes or so, Brittany said "let me call the store and see what I can do".  I told her "thank you Brittany" and waited ten minutes while she called Darnell Dixon, Customer Support Manager.

When Brittany came back in the line, she said "you are outside of our return policy limits and need to deal with Apple".

Should I have been surprised?  Probably not. After all, customer service has become a thing of the past even though businesses are closing daily because in an economy in turmoil. I have been harassed, abused, and discriminated and retaliated against more times than I can recall over the past 5, 10, 15 years, So much so that I started a website called InstitutionalTerrorism.com, documenting story after horror story of large organizations treading on the rights, the emotions, the lives of innocent American citizens ... Verizon ... Century Link ... J.E. Dunn Construction ... Holiday Cruises ... Kmart ... Ryan Lawn and Tree ... Ace Tree Service ... Clean Green Lawn ... Kohl's ... Go Green ... University of Missouri - Kansas City ... Missouri Governor Jay Nixon ... Missouri Senators Claire McCaskill and Roy Blunt ... Missouri State Senator Rob Schaff ... Missouri Attorney General Koster ... the Missouri Department of Higher Education ... an "unnamed" school district that discriminated against a woman for being Italian ... the U.S. Department of Education ... the Greater Kansas City YMCA ... St. Therese Catholic Parish (Kansas City, MO) ... Kansas City's Catholic Bishop Finn (convicted protector of a child molester priest) ... TO NAME JUST A FEW!

Remember the movie NETWORK and the aging newscaster who wailed "I'm sick and tired and am not going to take it anymore! ... I'm sick and tired and am not going to take it anymore! ... I'm sick and tired and am not going to take it anymore!"?  Well, let me just say that I CAN RELATE ... I'm sick and tired and AM NITE GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

If you are sick and tired, please let me know your story.  If nothing else, you can cathart a little, releasing some of that pent-up tension before you explode and do further damage to your body as stress does. Maybe we can even do something as a group that we as individuals cannot. These businesses, companies, organizations, bureaucracies, institutions DO NOT CARE ... THEY DO NOT HAVE TO!

V3 is a Trademark of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - Copyright 2013 - All Rights Reserved

Copyright 2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved

Tax Scams and Robbers ... The Bilking of America(ns)

BY

C.T. Sorrentino

I do not know about you, but I stress over money more than anything.  As I discussed in last week's post, one of the primary causes of conflict in relationships today is financial ... MONEY ... or lack thereof. I discussed credit and credit scores as a source of conflict in my last post, educating you on some pitfalls and secrets, and telling you how to stay on top of your credit score (Vantage or FICO) and avoid potential problems down the road.

I saw a story on "Rock Center with Brian Williams" last night about tax refund fraud and the IRS. Apparently, this has become a very lucrative crime with scumbags stealing identities (very easy) and filing made-up tax returns IN YOUR NAME ... TO THE TUNE OF $5 BILLION LAST YEAR!

If you have worked with or for the federal government, you have witnessed WASTE in unfathomable proportions, fraud and abuse as well, but waste is rampant! Government departments and contractors waste HUNDREDS OF BILLION$ EVERY YEAR and this $5 billion scam is just the tip of the iceberg!

Medicare fraud, social security and disability fraud, and now tax fraud, if there is a way to defraud the government or waste taxpayer dollars, someone has figured it out.

There was another story on the same program about Carnival Cruiseline and the fact that they pay only 0.6%, that is less than one percent, in international, federal, state...etc. taxes! Not only that, they have bilked the US Coast Guard and Navy  out of over $2 million over the past year in recovery operations for their poorly maintained fleet alone. That does not include the millions being spent on the Costa Concordia (one of their ships) clean-up effort. Their CEO is the proud owner of the Miami Heat basketball team and one of the richest men in Florida, yet his company (Carnival) rips-off billions from United States citizens every year ... what a great American!

Bank of America, Pfizer, and hundreds of other behemoth corporations pay 0.0% in tax to our government to the tune of over $70 BILLION every year by taking their accounts offshore and exploiting tax laws that are so complex and detailed the IRS has difficulty understanding them.  Really?  $70 million gone and nobody cares?  I pay more in taxes than Bank of America?  What a great country!

I have witnessed, first-hand, government/contractor waste on a huge scale recently.  I cannot go into detail because of pending litigation, but this one contractor AND THE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OFFICER supposedly "overseeing" the contract, are wasting many millions of dollars annually and this is just one relatively SMALL contract! If the Department of Defense would join us in the 21st Century and take the steps necessary to give our military confidentiality when seeking mental healthcare, this particular contract would not even be necessary! A contract a few simple policy changes would eliminate all together wastes tens, if not hundreds, of millions each year. How absurd is that?

With all of that being said, why the hell do the White House, Congress, Pentagon, and many other federal entities primarily target personnel and benefits when things get tight? Why do they not focus on the massive amounts of fraud and waste within our own government, bilking American taxpayers out of HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUALLY and running up our deficit INTO THE TRILLIONS!

We should not stand for this ANY LONGER! If you are sick and tired of government/contractor fraud, waste, and abuse, LIKE and SHARE THIS POST with all of your friends.

Until we citizens, the American taxpayers, the people who elect these morons and pay their salaries, say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and unite in defiance, these frauds, wastes, and abuses will continue unabated.

END THE APATHY...UNITE...GET OFF YOUR BUTT AND STAND-UP FOR OUR COUNTRY...BEFORE WE DO NOT HAVE ONE TO STAND-UP FOR!

ENSURE every citizen, every Service Member & Veteran, you know SEES THIS POST! LET'S START A NON-VIOLENT UPRISING, DEFIANCE AGAINST INSANITY AND SUPPORT WHAT IS RIGHT, BY UNDERSTANDING JUST ONE PROBLEM AND SIGNING THIS  WHITE HOUSE PETITION: 

CLICK HERE to sign our White House Petition to Help End Military Suicides

God bless you and our great nation, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

Copyright 2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved

Institutional Terrorism: The “Good Ol’ Boys Network” at Work

By C.T. Sorrentino, MS, LPC, NCC

C.T. Sorrentino is a combat and disabled veteran, retired military officer, and licensed professional counselor.  He was an Assistant Professor of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership and Counselor at the United States Air Force Academy from 1988 to 1993  and has over 30 years of experience and education in clinical psychology and mindfulness-based cognitive-behavioral therapy.  He is the author of You Think, You Are…Anxious: A Journey from Avoidance to Acceptance, the first installment in the You Think, You Are series and is the creator of Body-Mind-Behavior Therapy (BMBT).

Jerry Sandusky, Penn State’s long-time defensive coordinator, has been exposed long after an alleged 2002 child molestation incident, and several others apparently, and Penn State’s legendary coach, Joe Paterno, has been fired. Moreover, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Apparently, “Stand-Up” Joe (Paterno), as he is affectionately known by the student-body, did not stand-up and do the right thing when one of his former players, a graduate assistant at the time, approached him with news of a ten year old boy having been molested in a shower at Penn State University by Sandusky in 2002. Sandusky’s alleged attacks apparently go back to the mid-90s and continued long after he was reported to Paterno and the Penn State Athletic Director.  I will not go into the details of the allegations because that is not the subject of this story. This is merely one example among thousands that occur in this country each year where innocent people are harmed and the institutions sworn to protect them stand by and do nothing…what I call “Institutional Terrorism”.

The Penn State cover-up reminds me of a similar case in the Diocese of Kansas City and St. Joseph, Missouri, very recently in the news for similar allegations. Catholic Bishop Robert W. Finn and the Kansas City-St. Joseph Diocese have been indicted by a grand jury on a charge of failure to report suspected child abuse by one of the diocese’s priests. This Class A misdemeanor carries a potential sentence of up to one year in jail and a fine up to $1,000 for the bishop. Finn reportedly failed to notify the police regarding the sex abuse of a minor by one of the priests in his diocese after having been made aware of the situation in December of 2009. According to the Huffington Post, Finn is the highest-ranking Catholic clergyman ever to be indicted on criminal charges in a court of law in the United States.  As I will discuss later, this is only one example of Bishop Finn’s propensity to cover-up for one of his own, also known as (a.k.a.) the “good ol’ boys network”, even when he knew his subordinates had done wrong.

As a retired military officer and licensed professional counselor for over 20 years, I have seen and heard of numerous incidents over the years where individuals have been abused, harassed, bullied, discriminated against, then ignored, ostracized or retaliated against for having the audacity to come forward to protect themselves or to file a complaint against their aggressors.

The United States of America has been in a “War with Terror” since September 11^th, 2011, a war with an invisible enemy and a relatively small number of casualties worldwide, comparatively speaking. The U.S. has spent billions and sacrificed the lives of thousands of men and women in the armed forces to wage this war, yet we are no closer to a conclusion than we were ten years ago. 

Institutional terrorism is a term I use to define what our nation’s corporations, institutions, and bureaucracies (large organizations) are doing to their workers when they abuse, harass, bully, or discriminate against them or tolerate the illegal or unethical treatment to occur without any repercussions to the offenders. Thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands or more, of our citizens are being tormented every day by an abuser, bully, “control freak”, sadist, or micro-manager, so much so that the stresses caused by these perpetrators result in illness, mental anguish (anxiety and depression), and even suicide or murder (as in going “postal”). What are the other costs? Not just the emotional costs the victims must face night after night, morning after morning, but the real costs related to sick days, medical treatment, administrative time, legal fees, and court costs brought about by their perpetrators? We are talking about billions of dollars annually, and those are just the monetary costs.

All public and private institutions in our country are required by law to treat the people within their organizations fairly and without animus based on their race, religion, gender, national origin, age, sexual orientation, veteran status, and other protected categories. The laws which protect these people include Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination; and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 among others. However, the penalties for not complying with these laws are considered “civil” infractions, not “criminal” acts and those found guilty are given a “slap on the wrist” in the form of monetary compensation to the victim by a jury, if it ever gets that far. Even then, these large organizations have high-priced lawyers defending them, scaring away complainants whom rarely have the resources to fight back, and insurance policies to “pay off” the claims if they are, in-fact, ever held accountable in a court of law.

Having defined institutional terrorism and discussed how our laws (fail to) protect workers and others covered under these statutes, I will now elaborate on a few such cases and provide a synopsis of what I believe needs to be done to put an end to these practices. 

Victim #1 is in a helping profession, a generally tolerant, easygoing, empathic person and it is normally quite difficult to ruffle his feathers. Having spent many years in the military, several of them in combat zones, he has also learned to be very patient, respectful of others, and loyal to his superiors and to the organization in which he works.

In December of 2007, Victim #1 and his wife were traveling from their home in Colorado Springs, Colorado to visit Florida with the intention of possibly relocating.  He had told an old and dear friend who lives in a large Midwestern metropolitan area that they would be passing through, so his friend was gracious enough to invite them to stay at their home for the night, which happened to be Christmas Eve. This man had been Victim #1’s commander while assigned to the NATO headquarters in Naples, Italy and, beside being his former boss, they had become very good friends. Who else would invite you to spend Christmas Eve and morning with him and his family, right?

To make a long story short, on Christmas eve, as they sat around the fire having a glass of wine, His friend asked Victim #1 if he would be interested in moving to the area because he had an opening for a purchasing manager in his company. His friend had become the president of a subsidiary of one of the nation’s largest construction companies after retiring from the Army a few years before and was in a position to offer Victim #1 a quite tempting and lucrative offer.

After quite a bit of deliberation, Victim #1 and his wife decided the offer was too good to turn down even though they had no desire to move to the Midwest. He had a cursory interview for the job shortly thereafter, was hired, and moved 600 miles to the area in March 2008. Sounds wonderful, does it not? In such a friendly Midwestern city, what could possibly go wrong?

Well, Victim #1 was bullied, harassed, and threatened by his new thirty-something MBA of a boss from the very beginning, putting up with it for over a year before approaching his friend (his boss’s superior) to discuss the problem. To Victim #1’s utter amazement and dismay, his “friend” threw Victim #1 out of his office, not wanting to even listen to his side of the story. Victim #1 went immediately to human resources (HR) to fill them in on what was going on. He filed a formal complaint against his immediate supervisor a few days later.

Victim #1 had thought that his good friend would never believe the word of such a rude and unprofessional person over that of an old friend and fellow military officer. Friendship is an important bond, one that cannot be broken except in the most extreme circumstances, but officership, the bond between fellow military officers, is one that Victim #1 thought was insurmountable and unbreakable. His “friend” had broken both of those bonds and Victim #1 was devastated.

Once he filed the complaint, the retaliation commenced. The very day he visited HR for the first time, his ex-friend approached him and asked, “So, are you going to resign”? Victim #1 told him that he had no intention to resign and that he (his ex-friend) was picking the wrong side. In addition, the very day he filed the complaint with HR, Victim#1 was brought into an office with his bosses and a representative from HR and, after having been a model employee for over a year, receiving a promotion and a substantial bonus in recent months, Victim #1 was given a written performance plan. Suddenly it was his behavior that was in question, not his boss’s.

It was obvious what was happening in the weeks that followed with Victim #1’s supervisors, including his ex-friend, scrutinizing everything Victim #1 did on a micro-level, bringing him into meetings and lambasting him for one thing or another, even in front of subordinates. He complained to HR about the retaliation, but it was obvious that they would not interfere with the “good ol’ boys network” within the company. His ex-friend was too powerful and had chosen whom he would support. Not knowing what his rights were and psychologically beaten, Victim #1 resigned from his lucrative position after just 15 months, during the worst recession since the great depression, rather than be subjected to the daily torment he had been subjected to for so many months.

Victim #2 had a secure position in one of the “best” school districts in the city. Having been lured from Colorado Springs, she had given up a well-paid tenured position for an excellent salary in this highly respected school district. Victim #2’s principal, who was also new to the school and uninvolved in her hiring, made it obvious from the beginning of year one that she did not like Victim #2, treating her coldly and differently than she did all of the other teachers (who happened to be fair-haired, blue-eyed, and fair- skinned for the most part). I will also point out that there was not a single minority out of 35 full-time employees in the entire school. Year one seemed to go well even though Victim #2 was routinely treated rudely by her principal.

However, at the beginning of year two, it was obvious that something had changed. A little over a month into the school year, Victim #2’s principal decided to put her on a performance plan, even though she had been a model educator for 17 years without a single blemish on her record. I cannot go into details because Victim #2’s discrimination and retaliation case has not yet gone to trial, but she was terminated illegally for filing a lawful complaint based on national origin discrimination (she is an Italian citizen).

The school district supported the perpetrators of the discrimination, performing a cursory investigation at best before finding that “no discrimination” had occurred (one of the perpetrators actually performed the initial  investigation). Of course, they would say that, not admitting publicly that one of their own had been negligent. The superintendent and school board even refused to hear Victim #2’s appeals in order to protect their employees from further unwanted public scrutiny. Fortunately, the teacher’s union was involved from the very beginning, sitting in on every meeting between Victim #2 and the district and supporting her 100 percent. She has a solid case and one of the best discrimination lawyers in the city on her side, but the worst that can happen to the district and the perpetrators is a financial judgment against them. Their insurance company will probably end up paying a majority of the costs once Victim #2, hopefully, prevails.

In July 2010, Victim #3 was attacked in what he thought was a safe haven, the university he attends as a post-graduate student. By the way, Victim #3 is a Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society scholar with a 4.0 GPA in four semesters in the School of Education and a 96 percent average in his courses. Victim #3 is also a non-traditional student being over 50 and a military (disabled) veteran.

He filed a complaint against an instructor in July 2010 for possible discrimination on a course project on which he was graded drastically different (lower) than his classmates for no apparent reason. His advisor, a woman of color, accepted the complaint on behalf of the university, the investigation was mediated within the School of Education, and both sides were satisfied with the result. His advisor did make a strange comment at the end of their first meeting on the issue, stating, “I hope you learned something from this”, as if he, the victim, should learn something from being treated differently and discriminated against? He sent an email to his advisor noting the inappropriate nature of her comment, but thought little more about it.

In May 2011, Victim#3’s advisor called him into a meeting and accused him, without warrant, of acting “aggressive and threatening” in email communications with faculty. He noted that he was surprised by such an accusation and when he asked for specific examples of such behavior, his advisor could provide not a single example, saying “it’s just a perception” (that’s what people apparently say when they want to demean or accuse a person and have no evidence to substantiate their claims). His advisor then threatened his status in the program, telling him that she did not think he had the ability to complete the program successfully, even though Victim #3 is a high-ranking retired military officer, highly decorated war veteran, and Phi Kappa Phi scholar. After doing a little research, it turned out that his advisor was friends with the instructor Victim #3 had filed the complaint against in July 2010, having done research, written papers for journals, and presented at conferences together on several occasions.

When Victim #3 filed a complaint of retaliation and discrimination with the university’s Office of Affirmative Action against his advisor, he was met with resistance from the beginning. Having officially accepted the complaint, they gave him the email runaround for over a week, even insulting him, comparing him to those who had discriminated and retaliated against him (in an email inadvertently sent to him and meant for the Chancellor’s Chief of Staff). The Deputy Chancellor for Diversity, Access and Equity finally decided that Victim #3 had no basis for a complaint because he “had not followed proper procedures” and refused to investigate his legitimate complaint when, in fact, he had followed university policies to the letter.

Having nowhere to appeal within his university, Victim #3 appealed to the president of the state university system, his chancellor’s boss. Even the president of the university refused to acknowledge his complaint until it was sent certified mail, return receipt (signature required) with copies going to the victim’s U.S. senator and representative, state senator, Missouri Department of Higher Education, and the governor as well as several local media agencies (television and print). Since the acknowledgment of receipt of his complaint by the president’s assistant over three months ago, Victim #3 has not heard a single word from anybody, including his elected officials. In the interim, he was forced to withdraw from courses two semesters in a row, being only two semesters shy of graduation, because his complaint has not been successfully resolved. Victim #3’s principles prohibit him from attending an institution that treats people the way this institution has done and will not pay another cent in tuition, even if that means not graduating, which seems highly likely at this point. It is amazing that a public institution of this size and stature, a state university, is not held accountable for their actions when they fail to enforce the very diversity policy and U.S. laws they are sworn to uphold.

Victim #4’s church has joined the list of organizations that could not care less about human beings, protecting their own at all costs.  Having gone through a very difficult two years financially (and emotionally), Victim #4 and his wife started businesses to try to make ends meet. Their only option, to try to salvage their lives from financial ruin, was to start businesses in their respective areas of interest and expertise.

Because they were struggling financially, the only way they could give back to their (Catholic) church was through the donation of time and services, and they had been attempting to do so for several months. They attempted to contact the business manager of their parish on several occasions, offering  thousands of dollars worth of their services to the needy. Having been ignored for months, they wrote an email to the manager explaining their situation, but they received a reply from the parish priest, not the business manager. Instead of getting answers to their questions and concerns, the response from the priest was superficial, defensive, and insulting. He defended his business manager’s behavior, indicating that Victim #4 was incorrect in his assessment of the situation. 

Victim #4 decided to write back, telling the priest he was confused and disappointed by his response. Two weeks passed without a word, so Victim #4 decided to take it to the next level, sending an email to the bishop of the diocese (with all previous messages attached), again explaining what he wanted to accomplish and expressing his disappointment with the response from his priest. He told the bishop (this is the same bishop, Bishop Finn, who is now being investigated for covering up knowledge of a pedophile priest and indicted) what had happened and, again, the bishop missed the mark, defending the parish priest instead of offering a simple apology and solution to the situation.

Once again, the diocese protected one of their own instead of doing the right thing, admitting to a mistake, and trying to resolve the problem professionally and amicably. Bishop Finn obviously has a history of covering-up for and protecting his own as is obvious in the charges against him for covering-up for the pedophile priest.

Finally, Victim #5’s business advertisements (postcards) were approved by his local YMCA’s general manager to be placed in their “vendor” area, providing several customers and hundreds of dollars in business revenue each month.  The ads were left “mostly” undisturbed for over a year, having been located in the same exact spot during that entire time.  Various business owners, who felt they could displace the ads with their own any time they pleased, had vandalized the postcards from time to time during that period. In May 2011, Victim #5’s advertisements were once again displaced by another business’s, so Victim #5 complained to YMCA staff. The staff, including the general manager, all of whom appeared defensive, saying they “didn’t have time” to manage business advertisements, seeming  perturbed by the complaint. Oddly, the postcards suddenly started to disappear in bulk (50 or more at a time) and when Victim #5 asked a staff member what had happened to the cards, he was  informed that the general manager had removed them.

Victim #5 brought the matter to the attention of the general manager, but she appeared to care less, giving him the impression that she was in-fact behind the vandalism and petty theft of the cards.  The victim’s business is a service-disabled veteran-owned small business by the way.  Having mentioned the problems to management on numerous occasions, they seemed to care less, appeared to not want to be bothered, and in-fact appeared resentful and even hostile at times.

Getting no assistance or resolution from YMCA staff, Victim #5 decided to file a report with the local police department and sent a letter of complaint (certified mail with return receipt/signature) to the YMCA Board of Directors, asking them to have their staff refrain from stealing postcards and treating him (a service-disabled veteran business owner) differentially from other business owners.  Nearly six months have passed and the YMCA Board of Directors has yet to either acknowledge or respond to his official complaint against YMCA staff. He has since removed his business’s advertisements and the businesses are, unfortunately, closing due to lack of clientele and some additional assistance from the local YMCA.

Does anybody deserve the kind of treatment these victims have been subjected to? Absolutely not! Does it happen? You bet it does and these victims are not alone. Discrimination laws in this country are a joke. As I mentioned earlier, there is no criminal penalty for discrimination or retaliation. I had thought it was a crime to discriminate until just recently. However, discrimination and retaliation cases, when they proceed to trial, are heard in “civil” court, not “criminal” court.

It is not a crime to discriminate and nobody goes to jail for mistreating people based on color, national origin, religion, veteran status, or other protected categories. The worst that happens is a slap on the wrist. If an organization is found negligent, their insurance company usually ends up paying the bill. Most cases are swept under the rug and never heard about because the insurance companies settle with the victims before it can go to trial, avoiding negative media exposure and possible internal sanctions.

We are not alone and this is a huge problem in our nation. Many thousands of citizens and non-citizens are being abused, bullied, harassed and discriminated and retaliated against while the bureaucracies their aggressors work for turn their heads the other way, covering up for the corporate elite and refusing to do the right thing.

Joe Paterno and Bishop Finn could have stopped needless sexual abuse had they come forward immediately and reported the offenders as is required by law, but the institutions they represent let the offenders continue their abuses in the name of protecting their own and their institution’s “good” name. Whether it is child abuse, sexual abuse, bullying, harassment, discrimination, or retaliation, if an institution covers-up an offense, whether criminal or civil, they are not acting in the public interest, they are acting in their own interest.

As I see it, being not just an expert in human behavior, but a management and leadership expert as well, the many difficulties we are experiencing as a society stem from a lack of accountability as well as a lack of clarity regarding our values. Let me explain briefly.

First, individuals are not held accountable within organizations because to admit wrongdoing when a complaint of abuse, harassment, bullying, or discrimination is lodged against an employee, is to admit that the institution is culpable. I have seen it repeatedly that the powers that be refuse to protect the victim, siding with the aggressor in order to save face and avoid possible litigation and responsibility.

Because bullying, harassment, discrimination and retaliation are civil crimes at the very worst, they are swept under the table until the victim navigates a complex web of requirements and deadlines in order to file a case, often without the assistance of a lawyer.  Why no lawyer? Because the legal profession will not lift a finger until they see “dollar signs” and, by then, it is often too late because the victim had missed one step or strict deadline along the way, negating the validity of the case in the eyes of the law.

Did you know that if you are discriminated against, you have just 180 days (in most states), only 6 months, after the alleged offense to file a formal complaint or you lose your right to justice? Even then, you must follow the institutions complex policies to the letter, then filing with the appropriate state agency (e.g. Human Rights Commission) or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (federal).  Until these laws are changed, making them criminal rather than civil offenses, and the aggressors, as well as those who cover-up those offenses, are held accountable, going to jail when appropriate, these institutions will continue to hide their atrocities as was recently the case at Penn State and in Kansas City’s Catholic diocese.

Second, individuals and institutions have lost touch with their values, if they ever had any in the first place. I have seen it repeatedly in my practice; people do not have a clue what their core values are. That is why my therapy, Body-Mind-Behavior Therapy (BMBT) focuses on values clarification and living a value-driven life. Without clearly defined values, it is impossible to set clear, just, and attainable goals. These institutions have lost touch with what it means to do the right thing, even if it means making themselves look bad or turning-in one of their own when they have done wrong.

Until many more Americans and American institutions start holding their people accountable and stop giving “lip service” to their core values, starting to make decisions based on them instead, our country is going to continue to deteriorate. We see it more and more very day. Bernie Madhoff, Elliot Spitzer, Enron, AIG, Bank of America, Joe Paterno, Bishop Finn, the list goes on and on, people and institutions will do practically anything and crush anybody that gets in their way in the name of self-preservation, preserving the status quo…“the good ol’ boys network”.

Chris Sorrentino is host of the weekly series, CombatCounselor Q&A, on YouTube’s CombatCounselor Channel, airing Saturdays at 11:00 AM CST.  This series answers viewer’s questions, taking them through ten steps toward better mental health while incorporating his proprietary, holistic, cognitive-behavioral approach to the treatment of anxiety and depression known as Body-Mind-Behavior Therapy (BMBT).  Chris also plans to write a series of books, theYou Think, You Are series, focusing on the role of cognition, physiology (e.g. diet, exercise, and sleep), behavior (positive and negative), and emotion in maintaining a healthy mind and positive lifestyle. You can follow Chris on Twitter @CombatCounselor or read his blog, CombatCounselor, on Blogspot.

Copyright 20111-2013 - 3rd Wave Publishing, A Subsidiary of 3rd Wave Media Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved