111 petitions

Update posted 4 days ago

Petition to Honorable William C. Thompson, Barry F. Schwartz, Equire, Betsey DeVos, Hon. Fernando Ferrer, James Milliken, Iris DeLutro, Barbara Bowen, Joseph Borelli, James Oddo, Dan Donovan, Chris Smith

Due Process Must Be Afforded To All at Queens College- City University of NY.

Let me start by saying, I do NOT want my job back.  My resigning had allowed me to finally enjoy time with my wife and children and has allowed me more time to deal with health issues. My main objective is to protect fellow colleagues and future student advocates who are trapped in a horrifically biased and hostile work environment.  I want to ensure that “due process” and CUNY Guidelines are afforded to all employees and students, regardless of race, creed, color, gender, and if they are a Complainant or Respondent.  CUNY and even Queens College, like any large, public organization, to battle as a single individual is almost impossible.  I have limited resources to begin with so; I figured I can atleast encourage CUNY to affect change.  It is well known that at a minimum, Queens College administrators will insulate themselves, circle the wagons so to speak, and have endless resources to battle any exisitng or former employees who decide to take hem to task, myself included. I am a former Director at Queens College who was first harrassed and discriminated against both racially and under ADA violations, as a caucasian leader who is married to a black woman and has 3 beautiful, biracial children and suffers from mental illness created and exacerbated as a result of the inhumane environment I worked in, various forms of aggressive (active and passive) and hateful and even racist behavior I was forced to accept and endure on a daily basis.   A handful of black employees, some whom never worked with or for me lodged or corroborated egregious complaints against me. These complaints included my being racist, using racial slurs regularly, being sexist and racist in my Hr practices, etc.  I honestly can’t figure for the life of me, why many decided to put their race before integrity.  It is well known I treated everyone who worked for me and with me with the utmost respect.  I wish I could share with all of you the full details of these complaints but, they were never provided to me in a detailed, written summary. The Chief Diversity Officer, Legal Counsel of the President, (both women of color) and the President and my supervisors refused to allow me to see and defend these horrible, slanderous allegations. Furthermore as I tried to manage certain insubordinate people who were allegedly anonymous complainants, I was hit with retaliation charges and complaints.  How do you retaliate against an anonymous person?  In all the instances, I was never provided exact dates, exact times, person who witnessed the offense. etc.  Basically conjecture was the College’s only tangible witness.  Also, myself and one of my employees were illegally recorded by another employee who was not in the office nor part of the conversation.  This same employee had a hidden video camera installed, which we found and reported.  Needless to say, her actions were never addressed.  I never heard the recordings, however; the College used this illegal recording to add charges against me.  I guess privacy only exists for a select few or members of a protected class. I offered to provide countless witnesses and physical evidence on numerous occasions with regards to all allegations, only to be ignored via email and phone and the College refused all my evidence and ignored supportive individuals who wished to defend my 12+ years of dedicated  service to my students and the institution.  I was denied a meeting with the President, with whom I thought I had a good relationship.   The College, until the very end, even manipulated me and intimidated me from seeking assistance from my union.  I was also warned not to go to CUNY directly, as it would be “a nuclear option” for me. I also sent emails to the College administrators and HR stating the harrassment and health issues being created and exaxerbated, prior to even the first complaint being lodged against me. My medical providers issued documentarion alerting them of the damages I was falling victim to.  I even filled out an ADA special accommodation request form which was never responded to, let alone being given assistance, acknowledgement, or any alternatives.  Many discriminatory and malicious actions were taken against me for my mental health issues in conjunction with being victimized by a slander and libel campaign.  In fact, my HIPPA rights were violated as my ealth condition along with the allegations spread across campus like a wildfire. I had an untarnished HR record, with strong relationships throughout the entire campus and with a diverse population of staff and students.  To provide just a small example,  It is alleged that a prior supervisor and woman of color corroborated the fallacies with the original complainant. When I worked for her I was never written up and received positive evaluations.  All of a sudden, a friend of hers and other friends begin the campaign and she was right on board.  It should also be noted that she was friends with the investigator and that there are allegations of impropriety against her, of which I have all the documentarion.   It should be noted that the original complainant absolutely refused to cooperate with the investigation, yet the Title IV Officer and Chief Diversity Officer (woman of color) decided to embark on a witch hunt, with the encouragement and support of the  College’s Chief Legal Counsel and President of the College. Ultimately, I knew what was coming so, I decided to resign of my own accord due to health concerns and the affect it was having on my defenseless wife and 3 small children.  My union could not do much to assist me so, I am now in the middle of my EEOC process.   Until then, I have former employees/friends who are also being subjected to the constant harrassment and bullying I endured for years.  They have remained somewhat silent because after so many years when I began to defend myself, an institution known for finding basic racism where none exisits or students under Title IV are guilty until proven innocent (just like white, male employees), they fear they will be subject to similar retaliation.  Interestingly enough, a day or two after I resigned ; the College had a meeting with my former personnel to discuss the break up and changes in the department, the budget/activity fees paid by students, and the student funded building for which I served as the administrator. There is so much more to this story and I apologize for being so verbose as it is.  My goal is not to besmirch the reputation of CUNY, Queens College, and the employees who have adversely affected my life and that of my family.  This is why I must be a bit ambiguous, as I need to ensure I do not say or do anything that could affect the legal discovery process for my representation or create a litigious action if I started naming individuals.  I apologize if that creates some vacancies in your mind when assessing this situation. Like I mentioned earlier, I don’t want my job back nor do I want revenge on some of the most unethical people I never thought exisited.  I don’t want anyone fired or negatively affected.  I want future change and justice for others.  God will take care of me and my family until I find a new employment opportunity. I just want future employees to never endure what I have for over a decade and have it end the way it did for me.  I want future employees to be able to serve our students as effectively as they can and feel good doing it, without operating under fear, hostility, reverse racism, and most of all unfair HR, Diversity, and legal practices.  Everyone originally involved should be ashamed!  The students and staff at Queens College deserve better. 

Stephan Aiello
128 supporters
Update posted 3 weeks ago

Petition to Dr. Geert ten Dam, Dr. Jet Bussemaker, Mr. Ard van der Steur, Mr. Mark Rutte

Justice for Emily

-Important--------------------------------------------- The text below​ ​and​ ​the​ petition ​title​ ​above​ ​are​ ​the​ ​aftermath​ ​of​ ​the​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Amsterdam's​ ​petition tampering.​ ​To​ ​read​ ​our​ ​petition,​ ​please​ ​go​ ​to​ ​the​ ​link​,​ ​and​ ​please sign​ ​only​ ​after​ ​you​ ​have​ ​read​ ​and​ ​agreed​ ​with​ ​our​ ​original​ ​petition.​ ​Of​ ​course,​ ​you​ ​are welcome​ ​to​ ​read​ ​the​ ​tampered​ ​version,​ ​however,​ ​please​ ​note​ ​that​ ​the​ ​statement​ ​below is the university president Geert ten Dam's version of the story and does​ ​not​ accurately​ ​reflect​ ​the​ ​cause​ ​we​ ​have​ ​initiated​ ​and​ ​have​ ​been​ ​supporting. Likewise, the​ grammatical​ ​errors​ ​and​ ​the​ ​incoherent​ ​prose​ ​are​ ​part​ ​of​ ​the​ ​aftermath of the tampering,​ ​and hence​, ​do not​ ​reflect​ ​our​ intelligence ​or​ ​literacy​ ​level.​ ​Please​ ​be​ ​assured​ ​that​ ​the​ ​link​ ​to​ ​our​ ​original petition​ ​is​ ​included​ ​in​ ​the​ ​petition​ ​letter,​ ​and​ ​therefore,​ ​the​ ​recipients of this petition ​​will​ ​receive our​ ​original​ ​petition.​ ​Also,​ ​if​ ​you​ ​condemn​ ​the​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Amsterdam’s​ ​petition tampering,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​bonus​ ​petition​ ​to​ ​demand​ ​the​ ​university​ ​stop​ ​petition​ ​tampering.​ ​Thank​ ​you. -----------------------------------------------------------     Disclaimer: This petition is about alleged psychological/verbal abuse of and discrimination against a rape survivor. It is not accusing the University of Amsterdam or its staff of rape or sexual abuse.   Highlights: A rape survivor alleged encounters abuse and discrimination The university dismisses all of her complaints  Soon afterward, the same professor impersonates the dean and sends a letter to the student forbidding her from conducting her graduation fieldwork project While she is appealing against the decision, the university invalidates all of her earned academic credits, stating she has made no progress in her graduation project Without her academic credits, she will lose her student visa and has to leave the Netherlands. Therefore, the university can circumvent the accusations altogether. Imagine you send your daughter to study abroad. One year later, she comes back with rape trauma without a Master’s degree. After spending three years overcoming her ordeal, she goes back to school to complete her studies. However, her past is held against her.  This is what has been happening to Emily (pseudonym). She is a Master’s student at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands. Five years ago, Emily had to give up her studies and leave the country due to rape trauma. In September 2014, she went back to Amsterdam to complete her degree. She decided not to let rape define her or dictate her future. She started the semester just like other students and did not ask for any special consideration. She did not share her past with her classmates in order to have a normal student life. Emily was happy to be back and continued working hard to successfully complete her studies. However, in October 2014, the director of her program (the only person who knew her from the previous time five years ago), approached her in class and made impudent and condescending comments about Emily’s private matters and health in front of her classmates. A few days later, Emily’s thesis supervisor informed her that the director had excluded her from a project because of “a concern for her wellbeing,” and she had to choose another one from other available projects. Emily felt utterly violated; she was not expecting a stranger to bring up her private matters, let alone tell her what she was allowed to do or not allowed to do based on her personal painful past that she had never consented to sharing. Her supervisor stated “I fully sympathise [with] you feeling you’re not treated like other students and feeling offended by that. At the same time, however, I also understand that what has happened has not only shaped you, but also UvA staff and that they do give [sic, recte: take] previous times into account.” Emily was never informed of any conditionalities when she was re-accepted into the Master’s program. The following week, the director of the program informed Emily that she was now allowed to participate in the project she was initially excluded from since budgetary issues were resolved. Now there was an additional position available. Realizing that her private information was not only inappropriately used, but also was exploited as a pretext for budgetary issues, she emailed her supervisor. She confirmed that the issue was indeed an administrative matter, stating “'using your rape experience against you for the sake of money' is not an accurate description of the decisions initially taken. Monetary issues played their part, but only b/c, in principle, the project had space for only two students. I.e. a decision had to be taken considering three students were interested.” After the series of events: 1. being publicly humiliated, 2. having her trauma exploited, and 3. being completely stripped of dignity and personal autonomy, Emily felt as though she was raped all over again. She filed complaints for harassment, privacy violations and discrimination. She specifically stated that she had never consented to disclosing her confidential information, let alone having it assessed or used for arbitrary and unilateral decisions by faculty members who had no medical qualifications. She requested that the university rectify the issues and ensure her that it would never happen again. In response to Emily’s complaints, the director relentlessly brought up Emily’s untruthful “mental problems” and undermined her credibility. The director claimed that Emily’s professors and classmates had reported that she had been “easily emotionally agitated” and expressed their concerns about her mental well-being at the beginning of the semester. The director used this story to justify her action in class. She claimed that she was not aware of the details of Emily’s private information, and therefore, was not capable of violating her privacy. She also claimed that there had never been a decision to exclude Emily from the project. Emily’s supervisor likewise testified that she had never told Emily that she had been excluded, and denied there had ever been such a decision. The University of Amsterdam officially supported all of the director’s claims and dismissed all of Emily’s complaints. Emily did not know what to believe after being told that her professors and classmates, behind her back, had reported her “mental problems”, which she herself had absolutely not been aware of. Moreover, Emily’s another professor, who had nothing to do with the complaints, showed up at the hearing in support of the director, thereby taking a stance against Emily, despite repeated pleas from Emily that the university handle the complaints confidentially and with sensitivity. Emily was also very puzzled by her supervisor’s testimony, especially since she had always shown sympathy for Emily’s trouble with the director. Furthermore, when Emily expressed her concern about her complaints putting her supervisor in a difficult position at the university, she responded “I would have no problems whatsoever.” Because Emily fully trusted her honesty, she believed this must have been some kind of mistake, and decided to ask her about the testimony. Her supervisor refused to explain and dismissed Emily from her supervision. After that series of events, Emily felt as though everyone was against her, and nobody would believe anything she would say. She felt completely isolated, powerless, worthless and hopeless. When she finally talked with her classmates in June 2015, they were completely shocked and assured her that they had never reported anything about her to the director. They had not noticed anything unusual about Emily, and besides, they would not have bothered to report anything to the director even if a new classmate had come off as different. They were never informed of or consented to their “testimony” which they had never provided. They also agreed that it would have been impossible for professors to pay attention to and observe one particular student among more than 30 students and determine her emotional state during the first few lectures. They signed to confirm that they had never reported anything about Emily, and also wrote supporting letters describing her with words such as: conscientious, hardworking, friendly, passionate, responsible and kind, and called her someone with integrity, diligence, respect, intelligence and empathy, and strongly asserted that the university’s claims had inconsistencies.   In July 2015, Emily received a letter from the dean of graduate school, informing her that she was not allowed to conduct any fieldwork project out of “a concern for her well-being”. She lodged an appeal against this decision. In response, the dean apologized for her feelings and misunderstandings, but denied any wrongful acts or discrimination. When she inquired about the letter, he informally admitted that the letter had actually been written by the director while he was on vacation, and therefore, he had not even read or approved the letter. When Emily asked him why he would not formally state so and why the director was not held accountable, he explained that it would affect his secretary because she helped the director send the letter. Emily has been contending that the dean’s explanations and excuses for “his decision” are pointless and nonsense especially since he is merely a scapegoat who has been cluelessly held responsible for the director’s actions. He is not capable of explaining “his decision” because he never made the decision to begin with. Emily is continuing to demand the issues be rectified based on the whole truth, with integrity, accountability and transparency. In September 2016, the university invalidated all of Emily’s earned academic credits stating that she made no academic progress in the past year. Emily could not make academic progress because the director forbade her from progressing. Furthermore, she was in the process of appealing against the decision, which has been taking significant amount of time and is still ongoing because the dean has been talking nonsense and refusing to provide the whole truth. Without her academic credits, she will lose her student visa, and will have to leave the country. In our opinion, this is whistleblower retaliation, which enables the university to remove her from the country and get rid of the accusations altogether. During the whole ordeal, Emily has been obliged to continue paying her tuition fees (14700 euros per year) even though she has been denied the education that she has been paying for. On the other hand, the university staff has been continuing with their lives and work without consequences, as if Emily does not exist. As Emily’s friends, we find the whole situation outrageous beyond what words can describe. Their actions make a mockery of not only Emily’s courage but also of the whole Dutch education system, whose members work hard to maintain a high standard of institutional diligence and integrity. Moreover, Emily went back to study and focus on topics such as human rights and education. The inhumane attitude and behavior of her professors, whose specializations include education rights, children’s rights and gender equality has been the ultimate betrayal to Emily’s hopes and desires to learn anything from these “experts”. After brutal rape, abuse, discrimination, injustices and retaliation, Emily has been through enough. She overcame horrific trauma she had never wished for. She decided to get her life back by finishing her Master’s degree. She stood up for herself only to ask to be treated like a normal human being. She continues to fight for justice, truth and integrity because that is what she believes in and stands for. She has done nothing to be ashamed of. She deserves justice and the completion of her Master's degree. Therefore, with this petition, we formally request the following.  Requests The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the Government of the Netherlands:     Conduct an independent, thorough inquiry into Emily’s original complaints, and hold individuals accountable for their misconduct Immigration and Naturalisation Service, Ministry of Security and Justice of the Netherlands:     Ensure that Emily will not lose her student visa until her graduation The University of Amsterdam:     Retract the invalidation of Emily’s academic credits and exempt her from paying tuition until the ongoing situation is resolved When we saw Emily just before she left for the Netherlands, she was very vibrant and thrilled to finally complete her Master’s degree. We want to see her return with her same happy face with her diploma. Please imagine Emily is you or your loved one. If you are willing to support Emily, please sign this petition. Thank you.    #enoughbsUvA Facebook: Twitter:

Justice for Emily
1,880 supporters