US DOL is threatening to dismiss my entire whistleblower retaliation case if I do not give them an audio file of a private conversation between me and DOL, so DOL can provide it to my ex-employer to try to use against me. My ex-employer is apparently attempting to retroactively wire tap a private conversation they were not part of and were not invited to, and DOL is apparently willing to help them do that.

On January 23 2023, the US Department of Labor OSHA 'Whistleblower Protection Program' suddenly declared they completed their investigation into my whistleblower retaliation complaints against Apple and the investigator requested a phone call with me to discuss the results. She said it would just be the two of us. Based on DOL's prior conduct, I was certain DOL did not actually investigate (again), but I felt like I was forced to participate in their ongoing theater. Because of all of DOL's prior misconduct, including the intimidation and threats during the prior phone call they had requested in 2022, I insisted that I be able to capture an audio recording of the phone call to protect my rights (and wrote that as my justification for the request). DOL consented in writing to me recording the call, so I agreed to participate. 

• Me: "I want permission to record the conversation we have because I do not trust US DOL to make oral statements and not deny or misrepresent them later, based on all of my recent interactions with your agency." (Jan 23 2023)
• DOL: "Ms. Gjovik, You can record the call. Please provide the time you are available tomorrow - 10am PT or 2pm PT." (Jan 25 2023)

When US DOL called me at the scheduled time on January 26 2023, instead of hearing the investigator assigned to my case on the other line, I heard the voice of the regional executive (also a naval captain). This is the man who had threatened me and attempted to intimidate me to withdraw my charge in that prior call in September 2022. I noted that no one said he'd be on the call and asked him to consent to the recording. He consented to being recorded. It was unclear who else was on the line from DOL, but it sounded like at least the executive and the investigator, though the investigator did not say a word.

Previously the investigator said the call would 'only take 15-20 minutes'. I repeatedly asked for an agenda and what I should prepare for, but no one would provide me insight before the call. In actuality, the call went almost three hours and at several points the executive complained I did not have resources in front of me (that I was never asked to have prior) and expected me to argue detailed facts and legal analysis related to my cases, on the spot, again without any notice prior. I complained about it on the call.

It became clear during the call that DOL did not investigate anything beyond my employer's position statement (they did not investigate much/any evidence or statements I had provided). The executive confirmed DOL missed material facts that could change the outcome of their investigation and said the team would go back and re-review the information I sent previously, as well as review any new evidence I could provide on several critical points. I agreed to send them this information and did so over the proceeding weeks, including responding to DOL's seemingly arbitrary requests, like to index files and emails previously sent that they should already have on hand.

At the start of the call, the DOL executive made several statements that I felt to be misrepresentative, if not coercive and incorrect, and I 'objected' several times and added my own thoughts 'to the record' of the call. He told me repeatedly there was no need to object and the call was informal and merely procedural. He said the point of the call was to determine if DOL missed anything in their investigation and he said based on what we discussed during the call, DOL did miss material things in their investigation. After he complained repeatedly about me 'objecting', I decided to pivot and let him say things I did not agree with, without formal objection, in order to be 'cooperative'. For the same reason, I did not argue the facts of my case like I would on the record or in any substantive format. I acquiesced to a number of his weird and even insulting statements, out of fear DOL would end the call and dismiss the case claiming I was not cooperating.

After the call, the executive emailed me to tell me my complaints to Marty Walsh's office about his behavior were forwarded to him and he investigated himself and said he's great. He also said my request to HQ to transfer my case was sent to him and he did not want to transfer it so he would not. He put this in a formal letter with a 'tracking number' and used the opportunity to also strongly imply DOL would not re-review the evidence and arguments I submitted prior, but now would only review 'new' information I had not sent previously. I was afraid they would try that and was relieved I recorded the call. I sent DOL an AI-generated transcript of the phone call and quoted the parts where the executive had said they would re-review things, not just look at new things. He then backtracked and said DOL would do what they agreed to do on the phone call.

On February 21 2023, US DOL then suddenly and inexplicably requested a copy of the audio recording of the phone call. DOL had not asked to make their own copy at the time, nor apparently thought it necessary. DOL had never mentioned wanting or getting a copy of my recording when I asked permission to record. The DOL investigation team also has no need for the audio recording that I could think of, so I assumed DOL forwarded the transcript to Apple's lawyers and Apple's lawyers wanted the audio recording so they could create a formal transcript. US DOL had told me repeatedly they'd share everything I sent with them with Apple, and would not share anything Apple shared with them with me. Apple also has incentive to attempt to quote my 'cooperative' engagement with DOL out of context, as Apple has no defense on the actual merits of the cases (US DOL, NLRB, California DOL, etc) and the substantive evidence is damning.

I asked DOL what they planned to do with the recording, but DOL did not respond. I told DOL I was not going to provide it to them, with the exception that I would provide it directly to OIG as evidence of OSHA misconduct, or if DOL could come up with a legitimate justification for needing the recording. DOL asked for the recording again, ignoring my prior questions and concerns. I said no again, and complained it seemed clear they were asking for Apple, which was not only probably unlawful for my DOL cases (me v Apple), but is clear obstruction of justice in my NLRB cases (NLRB v Apple). I complained DOL was attempting to obstruct a partner agency in the US government.

On March 22 2023, while DOL was supposedly still re-investigating my cases, DOL suddenly sent me another formal letter (pictured). DOL escalated their intimidation and obstruction, now demanding a copy of the audio file (yet still not providing justification why), and threatening if I do not provide the file, they may dismiss my entire whistleblower case, regardless of the merit of my claims. DOL statements meant even if the evidence proves Apple retaliated against me due to my protected activity, violating three federal statutes - that DOL would still toss my case if I don't give them a procedural audio file that they will no doubt send to the opposing party to use against me. I complained to US DOL that they were threatening to deprive me of my rights under the US Constitution, and rights under those three statutes, if I did not provide something to DOL that they had no right to ask for, and where the request itself may be unlawful. I complained to DOL that it was essentially procedural extortion as well as obstruction of justice. 

I told DOL the only circumstance I would provide the audio file is if DOL would draft an agreement that 'seals' the file, so Apple would not have any access to it and could not request it. DOL did not respond. The 'deadline' for me to send the file ran out on April 1st. I reported DOL to the FBI and Office of Special Counsel on April 2nd, and informed them of such. DOL has not yet responded.

Historic GAO reports complain of lawless conduct by this US DOL OSHA agency going back multiple decades, including complaints that the agency also refuses to accept feedback it needs to improve, or to implement any real reform. Should this agency even exist if all it does is retaliate against whistleblowers and help industry cover-up safety issues and fraud? Should this function be moved under DOJ or an independent agency? It seems clear this agency should not be allowed to proceed as is: under politically-appointed partisan politicians, dependent on campaign donations from industry. This agency is rot in our democracy and that rot must be dealt with sooner than later, before it spreads further.