Next Post

NEXT POST WILL BE PUBLISHED ON OR
AROUND June 7, 2016.

SHOWN TO THE RIGHT, ARE THE CONTENTS OF THE 11/27/12 LETTER SIGNED BY PRIORITY ONE CREDIT UNION PRESIDENT, CHARLES R. WIGGINGTON, SR. IN COMPLIANCE TO THE TERMS OF SETTLEMENT AGREED TO BY THE CREDIT UNION AND A MEMBER WHO SUED THE CREDIT UNION, ALLEGING THEIR WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE PRIVACY ACT.

Our Readership: U .S., Ukraine, Russia, France, Germany, United Kingdom, Poland, Malta, Malaysia, Laos, Canada, Greece, Turkey, Sweden, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Isle of Man, Portugal, Morocco and more!

Translate

SEARCH THIS SITE

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Lawsuits and Settlements

VICTIMIZATION

In August, we reported that a former member of the credit union filed a lawsuit alleging Priority One Credit Union violated the Privacy Act when one of it's officers intentionally and maliciously, published confidential information about the member's Priority One automobile loan and about her person, which had been published on the Internet. According to the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, the person who published the comments and identifies themselves as "Priority MC", published the highly confidential information without permission of the President. Furthermore, they now insist Priority MC is not an officer of the credit union. They're lying. 

The member's delinquent loan was not only the subject of collection proceedings but the member had been named a defendant along with Priority One Credit Union, in a lawsuit filed by her automobile insurance carrier. At the credit union, the only persons who would be privy to accounts that are subject to collection proceedings and that are subject to lawsuits are President Wiggington; the Director of Project Management, Yvonne Boutte; and Credit Collections Supervisor, Miss Alex Suarez. So which of the three intentionally violated the Privacy Act when they willingly intentionally published information about the member's automobile loan and person on the Internet? 

Despite that the member's information was likely published by a member of the management team, the President recently ordered termination of his Administrative Assistant, allegedly for violating confidentiality. According to the President his assistant allegedly discussed his cancer with employees of the credit union, however, if true, this is not a violation of confidential information as he habitually and frequently, publicly talks about what he describes as his "ball cancer" and goes into tremendous detail divulging the treatments he is allegedly undergoing. Coincidentally, the termination occurred just after the member complained that her confidential information had been made public by the credit union.  


We think the President used his assistant as a scapegoat and blamed her for the violation of confidentiality. This is not the first time he's done so. In 2007, told the Board that it was the IT Supervisor who mistakenly provided the credit union's printing company with member account and social security numbers that were erroneously printed on the exterior, front-side of envelopes containing ballots mailed to member residences. The error was actually caused when the President refused to abide to established security protocols. Prior to mailing the disc containing member information to the printer, the President refused to adhere to the credit union's protocols stating that as President, he did not have to do so. 


INCOMPETENCE, HYPOCRISY and LIES

Priority One recently responded to the complaint filed by the member whose confidential account information was intentionally published on the Internet by an employee(s) of the credit union. 

The response was prepared by Bruce P. Needleman, the credit union's collection and bankruptcy attorney. Mr. Needleman is the same attorney who litigated the lawsuit filed years earlier by the credit union against Henry Justice, the personal friend of President Wiggington and owner of the now defunct, Just Auto Sales. So why would a collections and bankruptcy specialist be appointed the responsibility of responding to a complaint alleging violation of the Privacy Act? It's clearly not his field of expertise. 

On July 31st, Mr. Needleman, told the court that he never received a copy of the Plaintiff's amended complaint even though the former member had proof the complaint had been mailed and received by Mr. Needleman's office. A copy was also mailed to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Inc., the member's former insurance carrier and who confirmed they received the copy. 

The dishonesty found amongst the credit union's officers including it's Directors is obviously one also found in it's attorneys. To put it layman terms, we think the nature of the complaint falls far outside of Mr. Needleman's field of expertise. 

The latest allegations filed against the credit union are easily remedied. The credit union needs to admit that one of it's employees, likely an officer, purposely violated the Privacy Act. After doing so, they should voluntarily enter into a settlement agreement and pay the member monetary costs for the attack leveled against her person and character. However, Priority One's President and Board Chair are not people who respect rules or laws or for that fact, members, so don't expect any admittance of wrong doing by members of this criminal band of officers. 

As we've witnessed with lawsuits filed over the past two years, the credit union's overpaid attorney's use the following three steps in responding to complaints:
  • Deny wrongdoing
  • Suppress evidence
  • Vilify the grievant or Plaintiff
Expect the credit union to again follow the same predictable pattern in contending with this latest complaint. 

Mr. Needleman was also provided with a statement by President Wiggington as to who in the credit union violated the Privacy Act and purposely published the member's confidential information on the Internet. According to the President, the perpetrator is "a disgruntled employee" who uses the handle, "Priority MC." So are we to believe that a disgruntled employee victimized a member in his or her effort to undermine the credit union? What a simplistic and inane excuse. How did the alleged and unnamed disgruntled employee obtain access to highly confidential information that was only accessible to the President, the Director of Project Management, the Credit Collection Supervisor and may we add, Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks? 

The credit union has already voluntarily entered into a settlement agreement with the member's Farmer's Automobile Insurance but has now refused to surrender the "pink slip" for the member's automobile. We've recently learned that President Wiggington, Board Chair Harris-Brooks, and Director Yvonne Boutte, and incensed with the member and have, according to Mrs. Boutte, decided to take their time in surrendering the title for the automobile. Members and prospective members should taken note of the credit union's behavior in this matter and understand that this is a reflection of the character of the President and how he chooses to contend with problems created by himself and his executive staff. 

The President's refusal to act appropriately has forced the member to file a Motion to Compel Discovery which asks the court to preside over issues caused by the credit union's legal counsel, Mr. Needleman. The credit union, actually the President and Board Chair, often play opossum when required to respond to complaints alleging violations of state and federal law. Their evasive and childish tactics usually play out to their detriment. Don't be surprised if Mr. Needleman fumbles again and unwittingly exacerbates the credit union's mounting legal problems. 

Litigation aside, what does the member's lawsuit reveal about the credit union and it's intentional refusal to abide to the Privacy Act? Clearly, guarding confidential information is inconsequential to a President whose agenda is to satisfy his whims and urges and who has no tolerance for structure. 



PARANOIA

The disturbing behaviors demonstrated by Beatrice Walker can be traced in great part back to President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. who believes that an invisible group of jealous employees seek to displace him. Months preceding her arrival, the President conferred with Ms. Walker on numerous occasions, providing her the names of the employees he knew for a fact were the blogger, bloggers and their confederates. 

Also, months before Ms. Walker's arrival, the President used credit union money to hire Reggie Ellis., the owner of Sepia Consultants and Investigations.. On a Friday in February 2009, the consultant arrived at the credit union at about 5 p.m. At approximately 5:30 p.m. the President closed the door to his office and shut the blinds and Mr. Ellis began a search for surveillance equipment the President insisted was in his office. The President's desk, file cabinets, telephone, and lamps were all scanned and after twenty minutes, Mr. Ellis announced that there was no electronic equipment in the office. Mr. Ellis' services were paid for using credit union funds. 

Eight days later, Mr. Ellis met returned to the South Pasadena branch on a Saturday morning where the two spent approximately 3 to 4 hours scanning the computers assigned to employees the President believed were leaking confidential information about his illegal activities on to the Internet. The consultant found absolutely nothing. 

The scan of employee computers caused network problems which persisted for almost six months before finally be resolved.  

The searches for surveillance equipment having failed, the President informed Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, that he knew for a fact that there were employees who intended to harm him and he believed would even attempt to shoot him. Again, there was no evidence for his beliefs other than his unfettered imagination. Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, approved the purchase of several cameras which were installed outside his office and in the halls leading the wing where his office is located. After the cameras had been installed, the President told staff, “Now I’ll be able to see if someone is coming to my office with a gun.”

A few weeks before the May 2009 annual meeting was scheduled to take place, the President easily convinced the ignorant Board that a “band of employees” was going to disrupt and possibly even resort to violence. The ignorant and poorly educated Directors embraced the President's fears and hired two armed guards and paid for three representatives from the law firm of Styskal, Weise & Melchione, LLP to attend the meeting including attorney, William Adler. Also, all the Directors and Supervisors were present. The meeting lasted 32 minutes from start to finish without incidence of a shootout, riot, or burning down of the branch. 

Apparently, former COO, Beatrice Walker, and President Wiggington not only suffer with a gross inability to create new business but they suffer from the same delusions which cause them to lash out against staff in an effort to strike down some invisible group of non-existent and ingenious ninjas. 

Thursday, September 27, 2012

The Story of Beatrice Walker, Part II

THE COWARD

Priority One Credit Union's President, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was named a defendant in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager, but curiously, the initial filing has been amended and his name removed. Does this mean he was not involved in the persecution of the Valencia Branch Manager? Hardly. In fact, the reason for the removal of his name was recently disclosed by the President, himself. He has disclosed that Paul F. Schimley, the credit union's attorney, called and informed the Plaintiff's attorney that if she was resigned to naming President Wiggington as a defendant that he would file whatever amount of motions are necessary, using the excuse President Wiggington suffers from cancer, and will ensure litigation is prolonged indefinitely so that it may take years before the lawsuit proceeds to court.   

As we've often written in the past, President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. is a man who works in the shadows where he slyly orchestrates attacks against employees. He is too cowardly to ever face any of his targeted victims. Subsequently, the removal of his name is hardly a surprise and manipulating litigation using the excuse of his alleged cancer is just typical of the games employed by Charles R. Wiggington., Sr. 


GIRL CRUSH

In late 2009, rumors circulated through all branches that COO, Beatrice Walker, was smitten by the beauty of the Valencia Branch Manager. Ms. Walker certainly made no pretense to camouflage her attentions to the manager. 

In 2009, she was introduced to the Branch Manager and within days, Ms. Walker would leave her office in South Pasadena at about 1 p.m. on an almost daily basis, drive to the Valencia Branch where she would spend the remainder of the day sitting in the Branch Manager's office talking and laughing loudly. 

By the end of the year, Ms. Walker who resides in the Santa Clarita Valley, submitted a request to the President asking if she could relocate her office to the Valencia branch, though the branch is small and had no physical space in which to build a new office. Was she hoping to share space within the Branch Manager's small office space? Ms. Walker used the excuse that relocating to Valencia would enable her to work closer to home. He rejected her request.

The lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager suggests Ms. Walker may have tried to force a "relationship" with the Valencia Branch Manager. The allegations leave an indelible impression of a woman desperate for a relationship who exacted her will, irrelevant of the potential consequences to the credit union and with no regards to it's inappropriateness, 

Ms. Walker's inability to control her emotions and abuse of authority have resulted in the filing of yet another lawsuit. As a result of her behaviors and the refusal by Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks; President Wiggington; and the Human Resources Department to interceded and stop Ms. Walker's illegal acts, the credit union is again forced to dig into credit union resources to pay for legal representation, all of which was entirely avoidable had the credit union's executive sector chosen to cleave to ethics and abide to laws. Ironically, the credit union is now forced to pay for Ms. Walker's defense even though she was terminated on July 8, 2011. In 2010, while walking through the Credit Resolutions Department with Director, Yvonne Boutte, Ms. Walker exclaimed, "I love it when employee are afraid." We wonder if her opinion has changed. 


NOT SO QUICK

Though the President's name as been removed as a defendant in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager, it does preclude him from testifying and answering questions about how he chose to respond to the complaint filed in 2010 by the former Valencia Branch Manager. He will also have to answer questions as to why it was decided to terminate Ms. Walker. We hope he's rehearsing answers that will possess some semblance of believability. 

The credit union's attorney, Paul F. Schimley, is being paid handsomely to concoct a defense that helps exonerate Ms. Walker because if she's found guilty of the egregious acts she's accused of committing, then Priority One may have to payout a hefty settlement. Of course, whatever defense is fabricated it will have to explain or at  the very least, succeed in deterring attention away from the President's and Human Resource's refusal to bring an immediate end to Ms. Walker's very public attack on the Valencia Branch Manager. Here are excerpts of the latest lawsuit: 
image
image
  image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image



Unlike Ms. Walker, the Valencia Branch Manager was well-like and respected by staff and officers. She also consistently proved her competency and succeeded in creating new business throughout the Santa Clarita Valley. 

Ms. Walker's attention towards the Branch Managers was witnessed by employees of several branches and sparked gossip about Ms. Walker's alleged intentions and about her sexuality. In 2009 and 2010, Ms. Walker boasted about visiting the Valencia Branch Manager’s home on weekends, during which the two would allegedly go out and have lunch and even insisting that the Branch Manager show her where she bought her clothes and had her hair done. Ms. Walker was being intrusive and even obsessive as she forced her way into the Branch Manager's personal life. 

Ms. Walker lost sufficient control of her behavior that, as mentioned previously, requested that the President allow her to transfer her office to the small and not very spacious Valencia branch. If her request had been approved, she would have shared office space with the Valencia Branch Manager despite the fact Ms. Walker was hired to oversee all branches which at the time included the South Pasadena, Los Angeles, Redlands, Riverside, Airport, Van Nuys and Valencia branches. Her relocation to Valencia would have placed her physically, far away from where the majority of the credit union's other branches were located. 

As also disclosed in the lawsuit and of course to no surprise, Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock, who is also the Director of Human Resources asked the Valencia Branch Manager to "get to know" Ms. Walker. This was his remedy to Ms. Walker's disturbing emotional and psychological behaviors. Interestingly, over the years, Mr. Smock periodically disclosed that in the mid-1960's, while attending the University of Cincinnati, he majored in psychology. Evidently, he learned nothing about human behaviors and how to contend with inappropriate behaviors in the workplace. Of course, time would prove his advice to be utterly worthless and preposterous. 

What the lawsuit conveys, is an image of a socially inept and controlling female who doesn't possess the ability to discern between appropriate and inappropriate behaviors and who believed retaliation was fully justified when she believed she had been chided. 

As the lawsuit also discloses, the feckless Human Resources Department resorted to the use of a meaningless assurances to invalidate the Branch Manager’s concerns. Historically, Human Resources under Rodger Smock, is a department that conceals illegal committed by the executive sector who allows the vilification and abuse of victimized employees. Ms. Walker's erratic behavior and very public attacks on the Branch Manager are disturbing and bring into question Priority One's ability to protect the safety of it's employees. 

Ms. Walker's erratic behaviors are also attested to that through the first half of 2010, she exerted tremendous effort to promote the Valencia Branch Manager and even transferred her temporarily to the South Pasadena that she could train her as a loan officer. So what caused Ms. Walker to turn against the Branch Manager and seek out her destruction? 

Aside from the refusal of Human Resources to intercede and bring an end to Ms. Walker's scathing attacks, the President used the incident as an opportunity to regain the authority he had been losing to Ms. Walker since she was first hired on June 1, 2009. In September 2010, the President accompanied by Rodger Smock, drove to the Valencia branch to inform the Branch Manager that Beatrice Walker had marked her branch for closure and to ask about her complaint verbally filed with Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval, just a few days earlier. The President also informed the Branch Manager that after closure of hr office she could remain employed and served in the reduced capacity of Assistant Branch Manager of the struggling Burbank branch and informing her that there would be a "slight" reduction in pay. 

After advising her of the scheduled closure, the President asked the Branch Manager questions about her complaint lodged against Ms. Walker. During the meeting he also listened to testimony from the  Business Development Representative assigned to Santa Clarita who provided statements made by Ms. Walker disparaging the Branch Manager. 

The President asked both women to provide him letters documenting their statements and turning to Mr. Smock, informed him he would immediately remove Human Resources from under Ms. Walker's authority. Before leaving, the President assured the Branch Manager and Business Development Representative that he would conduct a fair and unbiased investigation of their contentions and make sure the incident was resolved. At this point, we must remind readers that in 2008., President Wiggington was found guilty of having sexually harassed a former employee.  Inarguably, this is not the person who should ever be involved in investigating alleged violations of policy or state and federal laws. 

A few days later, the President received the letter which he used to expose Ms. Walker's character to Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. However, Mrs. Harris-Brooks was less concerned about allegations that Ms. Walker subjected the Branch Manager to a hostile work environment than she was about those regarding the COO's sexuality. The President was ordered to diffuse the complaint reminding him that it was he, who introduced Ms. Walker to the credit union. 

The President never investigated the complaint. He informed Ms. Walker of the allegations and removed her authority over Human Resources. She was mystified by the removal of Human Resources from under her authority was readily assured by the cowardly President that no actions would be taken against her. 

The President utilized Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, and COO, Beatrice Walker, to draft the letter which would serve to advise the 
Valencia Branch Manager that he concluded the conflict with the COO was due to a personality conflict. He also went on to express his genuine efforts to create a cohesive working environment. In other words, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. lied. 

He also informed the Branch Manager that if she wanted to transfer to Burbank to serve as Assistant Branch Manager, that her salary would be reduced by $24,000 per year. That hardly sounds like a slight reduction in salary. 

The President also suggested the Branch Manager reach out to Ms. Walker to make amends. When one considers the gravity and illegality of Ms. Walker's acts, the President's advise is both idiocy and absurd. 

The President used to the Branch Manager's complaint as an opportunity to regain his lost authority which Ms. Walker had all too easily stolen from him since her arrival in June 2009. Furthermore, since the investigation which found the President guilty of sexual harassment, the Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, has been sensitive to employee complaints alleging violations of policies and laws by members of the management sector. Mrs. Harris-Brooks has donned the attitude that employees who expose wrong doing must be expelled from the credit union. The Branch Manager, despite her excellent work record, had now been branded a trouble by Mrs. Harris-Brooks and her lackey, the President. 

The alliance entered into in mid-2009 with Ms. Walker had deteriorated beyond repair by February 2010 however, her favor with the Board had provided her with stable positioning that the President was unable to impact. At least, not until the Valencia Branch Manager provided him with a letter containing allegations that constituted violations of federal and state laws and which he used in regaining an inroad to the ignorant Board of Directors. 

And through the Branch Manager resigned at the end of October 2010, over the next nine months, the President would continue quietly exposing Ms. Walker's failures to the Board until July 8, 2011, when she was unceremoniously quietly escorted out of the credit union.  She apparently arrived quietly and left quietly though her stay at the credit union was tumultuous, chaotic and destructive. And though she's currently forced to answer questions about her activities in 2010, we believe most employees wish she'd just go away and never return. 

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

The Story of Beatrice Walker, Part 1

SHE'S BACK BUT NOT 
ON HER OWN VOLITION


Following her undignified ouster from Priority One Credit Union on July 8, 2011, former COO, Beatrice Walker has returned though in the capacity of defendant in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager. The lawsuit also names President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. and the organization as defendants and accuses each of egregious violations of state and federal laws. 


Ironically, the credit union that terminated Ms. Walker must now rely in part, upon her testimony in an effort to raise a defense that supports the President's chronic contentions that he never violated any laws. We beg to differ. 


Because the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker while she served as COO of the credit union, Priority One will have to pay for her defense. One would have thought that the days which she abused spending ended when she was fired. Apparently not. 


Ms. Walker may have arrived quietly at the South Pasadena branch on June 1, 2009, but over the next 25 months which transpired, she would create havoc, perpetrate abuses and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on wasted efforts to allegedly attract new business. Inarguably, she and the President are cut from the same piece of mud. 




PROCLIVITIES


Beatrice Walker, like President Wiggington, shared the same predilection for divulging confidential information about employees, about her plots, and about her aspirations to one day become President and CEO of Priority One Credit Union.


The hiring of Ms. Walker was completely orchestrated by President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr., who at the time was both her friend and a long time associate of hers. The decision to hire Ms. Walker was authorized by Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. There were three reasons for hiring Ms. Walker. These were:
  • The President insisted he needed someone to assist him who could process the projects he was too busy to attend to. 
  • He needed someone who was a marketing and business development expert who would help resolving the issues which were impeding the credit union from attracting sufficient levels of new business.
  • He required someone who would help drive out his enemies. 
In business, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. is both inept and slovenly. From the day he began his appointment to President, he chose to "play" instead of work. For example, in January 2007, he implemented the expensive and unnecessary sector of AVP's. At the time, he said, "They're going to be responsible for bringing in the business and all I have to do is sit back and watch." He sat back but they all failed to bring in the business because none possessed the ability to do so.

He hired Beatrice Walker because he really believed she possessed the competency to create new business but time proved that she was as inept and limited in her understanding of marketing and business development as he was.

Ms. Walker proved quite pliable in the hands of the President and shortly after her arrival, began implementing scathing efforts to trap, persecute and oust employees the President identified as his enemy. 

The fact that she's been subpoenaed to again provide testimony, can be attributed in great part to the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. After all, it was the President who provided her with a mandate to go after his imagined enemies. The two broke state and federal laws to carryout their scurrilous campaigns and found solace in the fact that Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock, who is also Director of Human Resources, would ensure the department did not interrupt their often illegal plots. 


Ms. Waker and President Wiggington are Defendants in the lawsuit filed by the last Valencia Branch Manager. They actually have little choice but to support one another and provide whatever testimony is necessary to extricate them from the legal predicament they created. At time of Ms. Walker's termination, their alleged friendship had ended, with Ms. Walker becoming an avid and vocal critic of both the President and the entire Board of Directors. 




THE ROAD TO HELL
IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTS

During her approximate two-year stay, Ms. Walker introduced products and services which she claimed would serve to create new sources of income for the struggling credit union. Though she spent tens of thousands of dollars in "developing" new products and services, almost all failed to attain the level of success she promised would be achieved. 


Ms. Walker's products and services were not so much her creation but entirely plagiarized. During her first three-months of employment, she would call associates in the industry asking for suggestions which she could introduce as her ideas. One of the first products she said she created which cost the credit union $30,000 to develop, was "Skip-a-Pay." The product received a lukewarm response from members and clearly, was not deemed a success. 


Another of her creations was Priority Pay, the credit union's version of a pay-day styled loan like those obtained from store front vendors. The reasoning behind Priority Pay is that it allows a person to borrow up to $700 without being victimized financially by the exorbitant charges and fees levied by predatory lenders. Unfortunately, the terms of the loan were not quite as wonderful as described by Ms. Walker and the actual loan was being provided by a third-party lender who was not the credit union. Members rejected the offer, making this one of Ms. Walker's first failures. 

She also introduced Courtesy Pay, the credit union's overdraft protection program. Under the law, the credit union had to ask members if they wished to enroll in Courtesy Pay but Ms. Walker stated that this was too tedious a process and ordered that all member accounts be coded for Courtesy Pay.  President Wiggington and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks allowed it seeing Ms. Walker's decision as one that would benefit the credit union in collecting a large amount of fees and charges and thus helping to ameliorate the cycle of losses caused by President Wiggington's detrimental business decisions.

Ms. Walker's decision to code every member's records for Courtesy Pay (overdraft protection). forced increased numbers of members into collections. Ms. Walker also learned that she would have to issue letters to all members inviting them to enroll in Courtesy Pay, though the letter was sent after the fact and it is probable that many employees were unaware they had been enrolled in overdraft protection. 

Ms. Walker also obtained authorization from the Board of Directors to build a more than $70,000 call center which she dubbed "a one-stop call center" and which she said would resolve the credit union's member service-related issues. Not only didn't it fail to achieve it's intended purpose but it actually exacerbated Priority One's service problems. 

Ms. Walker also obtained approved from the Board of Directors to remodel the entire main branch which included installation of wall-to-wall carpeting, painting, new window treatments, and ordering two customized large silver colored logos for the lobbies of the South Pasadena and Burbank branches. According to Ms. Walker, remodeling of the entire South Pasadena branch including the employee lounge room and employee patio; and remodeling of the Burbank branch's lobby would attract increased business. Her more than $150,000 spent on the superfluous missed it's mark and had absolutely no impact on eliciting member interest in the credit union's financial offerings. A year and five months after remodeling the lobby of the Burbank branch had been completed, the branch closed permanently. Clearly Ms. Walker's promises were never realized making this project a complete waste of money. 


NOT SO SUPER WEAPON


Beatrice Walker arrived quietly at the main branch in South Pasadena on June 1, 2009. Her arrival was quiet and without fanfare but her 25-month stay would further unravel the organization resulting in internal strife amongst managers, lead to the rapid decay of employee morale and in the end, immerse the credit union in even more scandals. What's more, Ms. Walker's arrival would mark the start of a period defined by lawsuits. 

On her first day of employment, Ms. Walker was escorted through each department by Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock. The Senior Vice President merely introduced her as "This is Bea Walker. She'll be working with us." Ms. Walker was haughty and refused to respond to employees who extended their hands to welcome her or who welcomed her. In the weeks before her arrival, rumors swept through all branches which disclosed a COO had been hired and "she's a hatchet woman." The description would makes it's way to then Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval, who immediately informed Rodger Smock and the President about what was being said. The President became incensed, stating he was tired of the rumors and the lies festering amongst the non-exempt sector. He of course was not being forthright again and as employees would soon learn, Beatrice Walker was indeed President Wiggington's own, personal "hatchet woman." 

Several weeks after her arrival, Ms. Walker stood before employees during one of the credit union's quarterly all-staff meetings and for some reason, felt impelled to explain how she was hired. In her account, she stated that she answered an ad in a newspaper. She submitted her resume and received a telephone call inviting her to interview with the Board of Directors and afterwards, offered the job of COO. She also made tremendous effort to point out that prior to the date she started to work at the credit union, she had never met Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. Her tremendous emphasis on pointing out they'd never met prior to the date she started working at the credit union caused some employees to grow suspicious and to question why Ms. Walker felt it necessary to tell people she'd never met the President until the first day she began working at Priority One. Ms. Walker's "story" would eventually be exposed to be a lie. 



image
image



Within a month after being hired, Ms. Walker introduced her friend, Loren Lillestrand, the owner of Lillestrand and Associates,  to the credit union. Superficially, the reason for hiring Mr. Lillestrand was so that he could develop profiles of each employee which would provide the credit union with a record of a person's strengths and interests. The information would be used in staff development, placing employees in positions whose responsibilities were most suited to employee strengths and interest. 


However, secretly, the more important reason for hiring Mr. Lillestrand was so that he could use his expertise as a consultant to identify those employees who the President labeled "rebels" and "confederates" of this  blog. Mr. Lillestrand erred in allying with is long-time "friend" and associate.  


Though more than $30,000 were spent on the services provided by Mr. Lillestrand, the information provided to the credit union needed to develop a stronger, more knowledgeable staff, was never implemented only because the President and Ms. Walker's agenda was to ensnare employees they believed were conspiring against their regime. Ms. Walker could never have imagined that her ambitious and aggressively executed plots would in time, lead to the deterioration of her working relationships with other officers including Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks but which would eventually lead to her eventual expulsion. 



image

The pinnacle to Ms. Walker's amassing abuses occurred in mid-2010 when her efforts to enter into a friendship/relationship with the Valencia Branch Manager, failed. Ms. Walker's response was not only excessive, it was disturbing. Her reaction was like that of a scorned woman but how is that possible if all she was seeking a friendship? 

In August 2010, Ms. Walker launched a scathing campaign fueled by unbridled emotions. In her frenzy, she inducted the assistance of an AVP, Branch Managers, the Consumer Loan Manager and the staff assigned to the Valencia branch. She publicly disparaged the Branch Manager's abilities, mocked her Spanish accent, described her as "a disappointment" and ordered that officers not respond to any of Branch Manager's voicemails or emails requesting business-related assistance. 

Ms. Walker's efforts intentionally created a working environment that was nothing short of intolerable and she actually did succeed in convincing the attention starved and ethically pliable, AVP, Sylvia Perez, into distancing herself from the Branch Manager even though Mrs. Perez was the Valencia Branch Manager's supervisor. Ms. Walker also succeeded in getting the Van Nuys Branch Manager, Cecilia Pereyra, to refuse to respond to the Valencia Branch Manager's business-related calls and emails. The pandering and chronically inept Consumer Loan Manager, Joseph Garcia, also stopped speaking to the Branch Manager and the Branch Manager's own staff distanced themselves from her with some becoming belligerent and even insubordinate. 

What's more, Senior Vice President Rodger Smock, was well aware of the campaign and even called the Valencia Branch Manager and asked, "Why does she hate you so much?" Hardly the approach one might expect from a competent Director of Human Resources but then again, Rodger Smock is not a competent Director. 

Having grown weary of Ms. Walker's attacks, the Valencia Branch Manager visited the South Pasadena branch and lodged a complaint with Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval. Unfortunately, Ms. Sandoval is as ethical and compliant to policy is as President Wiggington to federal laws prohibiting sexual harassment. 

A pseudo-investigation was conducted during which the President and the Senior Vice President drove to the Valencia branch and met with the Valencia Branch Manager and the Business Development Representative assigned to the Santa Clarita Valley. During the meeting, the President stated that he planned on removing Ms. Walker's authority over Human Resources. A few weeks earlier, she took control of the department and relegated it's Director, Rodger Smock, to "assist the President with special projects." There were two key reasons why she took control over the department. The first was to have complete and easy access to all personnel files. The second was that she was involved in orchestrating the ouster of Mr. Smock who she concluded was "useless", "overpaid" and "unnecessary to the operation." 

Unfortunately, she over-played her hand when she chose to launch an offensive against the Valencia Branch Manager and one which would in the end cause her to lose her clout with the Board of Directors and lead to her complete unraveling. 

And so, 13-months after being terminated, Ms. Walker is being forced to answer questions regarding her ruthless and abhorrent personal campaign against the former Valencia Branch Manager which undermined the clout she once enjoyed with the Board and which in time., contributed to the reasons leading to her expulsion. 


BANISHED

Though President Wiggington orchestrated the hiring of Beatrice Walker and though he had known her prior to her arrival to Priority One on June 1, 2009, following her termination, he moved quickly to eradicate all memory of her. 

It wasn't her business failures that had been the catalyst for her removal but rather, rumors about her sexuality which circulated through all branches. The complaint filed by Valencia Branch Manager had been insufficient for the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks to conduct an in depth and impartial investigation of the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker. It's important to recall that in 2008, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was found guilty of sexual harassment and it was the Board Chair who not only ignored the evidence proving he victimized a former female employee but the dishonest and immoral chair, reduced the illegal act to nothing more than humorous repartee between the 50-some year old officer and a 35-year old female.  

When the complaint was first filed against Ms. Walker, the President used the opportunity to to try and endear himself with the Board who had grown tired of his chronic failures and excuses trying to justify why business was in decline. Mrs. Harris-Brooks' reaction was predictable. She viewed the Branch Manager's complaint as a problem that could quickly develop into yet another issue for the credit union. She ordered that the President find a way of diffusing the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker. The President reluctantly agreed because this forced him to derive a solution to a problem he felt he was being forced to participate in. He, however, had not choice. After all, it was Mrs. Harris-Brooks who protected him when evidence proved he sexually harassed a former employee. For all intents and purposes, he was indebted to her. 

Before choosing to reduce the vile actions allegedly committed by Ms. Walker to a mere conflict of personalities, Mrs. Harris-Brooks and the Directors informed the President that they were concerned about rumors concerning Ms. Walker's sexual preference. Interesting that creation of hostile work environment, harassment, slander, same-sex sexual harassment, retaliation and even stalking were trumped by one woman's alleged sexual preference. 

Priority One's Directors are no small hypocrites. Before the start of the credit union's annual meetings, a Director always begins by praying to Jesus. Yet the same Directors who have the unmitigated gall to refer to Jesus in their prayers are the same group of tricksters who have used credit union monies to hide violations of state and federal laws perpetrated by Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. and it is some of this same group of bigots who admitted selecting Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. to serve as President because of his skin color. The Directors had absolutely no qualms with covering up sexual harassment committed by President Wiggington but they demonstrated an acute aversion to rumors and allegations that the COO might be a lesbian. 

Before the start of the annual meetings, a Director always prays to Jesus but it is this same group of tricksters who spent credit union monies to hide evidence proving violations of federal laws, and ensuring that the President who they chose because of skin color, remains well in place. They evidently have no problem with sexual harassment or immorality but they frown upon "rumors" and "allegations" that a female employee might be a lesbian. 

Within a few weeks following Ms. Walker's termination, the President severed ties with Auto Alliance, the automobile broker introduced to the credit union by Ms. Walker.  The COO had exerted tremendous effort to ensure Auto Alliance would in time, displace the credit union's long-time automobile broker, Universal Leasing and Auto Sales, but her termination brought an immediate end to her aspiration. 

Following filing of the Valencia Branch Manager's complaint, the Board began withdrawing much of their support of Ms. Walker and even issued a directive to Ms. Walker, advising her that she could no longer implement new products or service or issue letters to members without submitting mock-ups of her intended projects to the President or Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock. She became incensed. She couldn't refrain from telling some employees at the South Pasadena that she was deeply offended by the Board's order, stating that both President Wiggington and Vice President, Rodger Smock, were unqualified to review her work, describing each as "uneducated" and "incompetent." However, she also leveled criticisms against the Board, also describing the Directors as "uneducated" and :"inept." Her statements were reported to the President who immediately informed the Board Chair. 

On July 8, 2011, Ms. Walker was informed that her employment with the credit union was being terminated. Her employment was not severed because of the alleged violations of state and federal laws she committed against the former Valencia Branch Manager. Her removal occurred only after she disparaged the President, the Senior Vice President and the Board of Directors. 

In July 11, 2011, Mr. Smock posted a notice on the credit union’s Intranet, announcing that Ms. Walker was no longer employed by the credit union. 




EXAGGERATIONS

Beatrice Walker suffered from the same insatiable need to expound upon her above-average leadership abilities as does President Wiggington. And like the President, time proved she was devoid of competencies she boasted she possessed. 

A search on LinkedIn discovered several accounts all created by Ms. Walker. Some are inactive though a fourth provides an accurate record of her current biography.

BIOGRAPHY 1

The biography references “Priority One Credit Union” as her current employer where she serves in the capacity of its COO but fails to reference that her employment with the credit union ended on July 8, 2011. 
image

Biography 2

Biography 2, like Biography 1, references Ms. Walker’s current capacity as COO of Priority One Credit Union. This of course is incorrect.
image
BIOGRAPHY 3

Biography 3 like Biographies 1 and 2, states that Ms. Walker is COO of Priority One Credit Union. Does Beatrice Walker understand the definition of the word “current”? 
clip_image013

BIOGRAPHY 4

The fourth LinkedIn account we located contains a list of Ms. Walker's past employers which are Universal Studios City Credit Union, Pasadena Service Federal Credit Union, and Honda Federal Credit Union, but the record is intentionally incomplete. Why would this highly educated and based on her biographies and verbal statements, accomplished executive find it necessary to publish a partial history of her actual employment? Notably missing from her biography are:
  • Priority One Credit Union 
  • Electricore, Inc..
  • Airco Federal Credit Union

Just prior to her arrival at Priority One, Ms. Walker was employed by Electricore, Inc. a company located in Valencia, California. On June 2, 2009, we called Electricore and were informed that she resigned suddenly on Friday, May 29, 2009, without providing the customary two-week notice.  While working for Electricore, Ms. Walker served in the capacity of a contracts specialist with alleged experience in Human Resources. 

She had also been employed by Airco Federal Credit Union, located in Glendale, California. We received an email from a former co-worker of Ms. Walker who informed us that while employed by Airco, Ms. Walker allegedly caused monetary losses which forced the credit union to file a claim with CUMIS, the company's insurance carrier. 

There's are good reasons why Ms. Walker has chosen to intentionally omit references to specific past employers from her online biographies. While at Priority One, the products and services she introduced failed to achieve their intended results. Ms. Walker was also instrumental in terminating the last Burbank Branch Manager and a former Business Development Representative, both of which have filed lawsuits against the credit union. She also launched and carried out a vicious campaign against the last Valencia Branch Manager who was allegedly was subjected to harassment, same-sex sexual harassment, retaliation, coercion and even stalked by Ms. Walker. Her performance during her 25-month stay at the credit union was disastrous and her personal behaviors, appalling. What is also clear is that the Board of Directors and specifically, it's Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, failed and possibly even refused. to conduct the necessary mandated background check of Ms. Walker's past employment and performance. 

As shown below, Ms. Walker's past employment record in LinkedIn, describes her as a "Financial Services Professional" who had once been employed by Universal City Studios Credit Union. We've been contacted by former employees of that credit union who informed us that Ms. Walker was also a polarizing presence while at that credit union and that she was allegedly terminated by it's President because of her failure to make sound business decisions. 
image
image
image


image

Ms. Walker’s current bio also includes the following two recommendations written by associates and each praising her abilities and allegedly fine character.



image

Sylvia N. is a "Senior Consultant" at Lillestrand and Associates. In 2009, during a meeting with employees in South Pasadena, Loren Lillestrand described Beatrice Walker as a “close friend” who was allegedly “wonderful”, “highly intelligent”, "nice" and “charming.”  He was wrong. 

Sylvia N. describes Ms. Walker as "an amazing leader." The evidence of her leadership abilities while at Priority One prove that she is not amazing at anything she endeavors to do. And her termination on July 8, 2011 suggests that Board was not pleased with her "amazing" leadership skills. 


Sylvia N. also describes Ms. Walker as possessing "great intuitive sense" and "great caring spirit with her colleagues." No, she doesn't. She is neither intuitive or caring though she is conniving and brutal. Her business failures aside, her scurrilous persecution of the Valencia Branch Manager attests to her actual character which proved vicious and vindictive. 

With approval of Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, she also proved to be an undisciplined and wasteful spender adding to the losses begun by President Wiggington's deficient business decisions. She, like the President, proved to possess a disdain for policies and rules and it is her intentional violation of policies and laws which provoked the filing of lawsuits by three former employees. It was also she who ordered that every member's account be coded for Courtesy Pay (overdraft protection) though the law requires that the service FIRST be offered to members who can decide to accept or decline the offer.

Sylvia N's statements certainly don't hold true at Priority One Credit Union and certainly as COO, Beatrice Walker never demonstrated a "can-do attitude" towards anything she endeavored to do. . 

Sylvia N. is not the only person to publish a recommendation of Ms. Walker. Here is a second recommendation written by Dorothy M., an Interior Design Educator at the College of the Canyons:

image


*Since publishing of our post on September 25, 2012, Ms. Walker has removed all recommendations under this account.


The credibility of his recommendation is undermined by the fact that Dorothy M. refers to Beatrice Walker as "Deatrice". Dorothy M. writes, "From a business perspective, Beatrice is smart....:" The recommendation was published on LinkedIn. Any business recommendation attesting to the competencies of an executive should always be written from a business perspective. We do have a question. How does Dorothy M. an instructor at College of the Canyons where Ms. Walker studied interior design, possess knowledge about Deatrice's/Beatrice's competencies in business?

As for the personality traits allegedly possessed by Ms. Walker, it would be impossible to find a single employee of the credit union who would ever describe her as "funny, pleasant, personable and someone you would like as a good friend."

In 2009, shortly after being hired, she developed a "friendship" with then Director of Credit Resolutions, Yvonne Boutte, and with then Assistant Branch Manager of the Redlands office, Joseph Garcia, but by November 2010, her friendships with both ended bitterly and Mrs. Boutte and Mr. Garcia began telling staff members at the South Pasadena branch that Ms. Walker was ruthless, dominating, and cruel. Ms. Walker was also terminated on July 8, 2011, because of insubordination. If she possessed any of the qualities described by Dorothy M., they were never attested to during her employment at the credit union. 

Ms. Walker also never possessed an an Excellent grasp on [of] business practices”. Ms. Walker frequently submitted receipts requesting reimbursement of expenses and would often tear off the portion of the receipt containing the name of the business where she purchased products. Though credit union policy requires that executives who need a laptop submit a requisition form to the IT DepartmentMs. Walker refused to abide to policy and in 2009, purchased a $5000 on a laptop and ordered the IT Supervisor to process documentation needed to process a reimbursement. The IT Supervisor refused and so she initiated a campaign which slandered his reputation. She also produced fraudulent evidence which she later used to order his termination. 

In spite of having been terminated, Ms. Walker continues to be deceptive, publishing distortions of the truth and conveying an image that she is professional, accomplished and personable when the fact is she is a failure in business and possesses a vindictive and is cruel and dishonest. We suggest she hire a pricey consultant who can taken her horrendous failures and try to spin them into a positive without having to completely distort her actual work history and omit the names of employers who terminated her. 

In the end, it isn't her egregious acts and failed business decisions which most standout. It is the Board's failure to conduct a proper background check of her prior employment. We believe that background checks were not performed because she came highly recommended by the President. Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, may have ordered that the usual and required checks not be initiated because Ms. Walker promised the Board she would identify and remove all of the President's enemies from the credit union. And of course, the corrupt and useless Rodger Smock, the Director of Human Resources willingly circumvented all protocols because as the years have proven, he is the President's personal amoral puppet.



ECHOES OF THE PAST

It's really inexplicable why sexual harassment is such a reoccurring issue at Priority One Credit Union. We can't fully comprehend why sex in general, is such a prevailing factor at what is a rapidly shrinking credit union. Certainly, this was not an issue which ever surfaced prior to January 1, 2007, the date Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was named President and CEO of a then thriving credit union. 

Though prior to his appointment as President it was well-known that one now former executive used to spend a part of his day viewing pornographic sites while at work from his company-assigned credit union. The only reason many employees knew of this is because he openly discussed what he'd seen. 

Another person who violated policy was the Director of Human Resources, Rodger Smock. He openly entered into a relationship with a young male employee of the Member Services Department which was witnessed by both employees in the Member Services Department including it's then manager, Betty Hilliard, and by employees in the Loan Department. 

A third person who sexually harassed employees in the presence of Director, Rodger Smock, was Aaron Cavazos, the former Director of Lending who would often invite women to see his "anaconda.": 

However, actual sexual harassment charges were filed in 2008, when a former employee wrote to the credit union's attorney, William Adler, and informed him that she had been sexually harassed by the President for a number of years. An investigation was ordered and investigator, Scott Barer, of EXTTI, Inc. interviewed employees of the South Pasadena and Los Angeles branches and in the end provided evidence proving the President had indeed violated federal law. What's more, Mr. Barer recommended President Wiggington's termination. 

Like the President, Beatrice Walker is accused of same-sex sexual harassment which includes stalking the former Valencia Branch Manager. Coincidentally, while on vacation, the Valencia Branch Manager's two dogs were poisoned. We don't know who poisoned the dogs but it seems more than a little coincidental that this occurred while she was on vacation, a fact known about by the credit union. 

Here is a copy of the letter submitted in July of 2008 to attorney, William Adler: 


July 12, 2008


c/o William Adler, Esq.
Styskal, Wiese, & Melchione
550 N. Brand Blvd
Glendale, CA 91203

RE: Complaint Against Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. of Priority One Credit Union
Dear Mr. Adler:

I am a former employee of Priority One Credit Union, who was wrongfully accused and terminated for "kiting" in September 2007. Last week I received an anonymous letter filled with allegations regarding numerous slanderous statements made by Charles Wiggington, the current president and CEO of Priority One Credit Union, against current and former employees of the company.

I will begin by explaining the reason I am impelled to write. I was amazed by the fact that a person or persons, actually documented the many incidents of sexual harassment and verbal abuse I was subjected to while working at the credit union's South Pasadena office. I was also dismayed by the fact that I seem to be the only employee terminated for kiting, who was referred to CUNA. Liz Campo's kiting constituted numerous incidents yet she was not referred over to CUNA. I also read that Georgina Duenas and Gema Pleitez, circumvented banking procedures and did not place a hold issued by another financial institution which later resulted in an incident of non-sufficient funds. I called the company after receiving the letter and verified that not only does Georgina continue to be employed but she has also been promoted. I understand that she now oversees Credit Resolutions which is the company's contracted credit collection department, yet she has no experience in collections and as I remember, continually abused policy and procedures. I believe that the disparity in policy enforcement and preferential treatment shown some employees is defined as discrimination. Am I correct?

Of all the acts described in the letter, none is more insidious than that of restoring a business relationship with Henry Justice. At the time I called the office I was told that Charles had been informed that you also received a copy of the anonymous letter and that when informed by Diedra Harris-Brooks of its contents, he denied this newly resurrected business relationship with Mr. Justice. I was also told that upon conclusion of his conversation with Diedra, he immediately called Henry Justice and instructed him to deny any involvement with Priority One. I cannot fathom why I was terminated for one act of kiting while Georgina remains employed and was recently promoted and why the credit union has decided to go into business with Henry Justice, a person who literally absconded with thousands of dollars which belong both to the credit union and its valued Members.
In the weeks following my termination, employees of the company called my home and informed me that employees at the LAPDC and Aaron Cavazos and Georgina Duenas at the South Pasadena office, had been overheard speaking while in the Loan Department, about my termination. Rumors included that I approved and funded a loan for a man I was involved with; that I passed several bad checks; and that I misappropriated funds. I was mortified about the rumors and called Charles on his company cell phone. When I told him about the rumors, he rudely brushed me aside and in a condescending tone, replied that “only management” knew about the reasons why I was terminated. Based on Charles’ words, I concluded that the rumors were being spread by the credit union’s management sector.

My last 3 years of employment at the credit union were at times tormentuous. Every statement in the letter describing what Charles said and did to me is true. 

Though many of my co-workers witnessed many of these incidents, including Aaron Cavazos, Patti Loiacano, and Rodger Smock, none did anything to dissuade his harassment. I was also afraid to lose my job because I am a single parent raising a daughter. His statements humiliated and embarrassed me and demeaned my person. I have spent the last few days remembering the many things he said including the abuse termination meeting I was subjected to, as AVP, Lynnette Fortson interrogated me demanding an explanation why I had written a bad check. I now believe my termination, which was ordered by Charles, may have been an effort to quell me from disclosing the many acts he committed against me while I was employed. The duress and harassment and eventual termination, have left me emotionally injured and financially impaired. 

Why was Liz Campos not reported to CUNA? Why was Georgina Duenas not terminated for the check she deposited in 2007, which later bounced? Why were the required holds not placed on the check? Does Georgina Duenas or Gema Pleitez have the authority to circumvent banking procedures? Aren't policies to be enforced unilaterally?

Henry Justice robbed the credit union and escaped prosecution. He also filed bankruptcy and avoided having to pay back the money he took, yet Mr. Wiggington has allowed him to enter areas of the company which are usually off-limits to non-members and has decided to re-establish a business relationship with Mr. Justice. Can you please provide an explanation why resuming a business relationship with Mr. Justice is deemed right and why I was terminated?

The Human Resources Department at Priority One chose to ignore Charles' mocking, sexual innuendos, and slandering of my person. Why is that the company chose not to protect me, deprived me of my rights, and terminated me when Charles has done far worse to employees, the credit union, and evidently in the case of Danny Wafa, robbed at least one member of his automobile.

I am going to consult an attorney will file a complaint with the Equal Opportunity Comission and any other state or federal agency who will investigate and act upon my complaint. I will also begin efforts to contact other former employees who believe they were abused and mistreated by Charles. The Board of Directors has failed miserably in reining in Mr. Wiggington. Evidently tye years of complaints and rumors of wrong doing were not enough to get them to initiate an investigation. They are responsible for overseeing the credit union's sound operations but refused to intercede and bring an end to his [Charles R. Wiggington, Sr.] insidious regime.


It is interesting that in 2008, Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, chose to ignore the evidence and the investigator's recommendation and with the help of Directors, O. Glen Saffold and Thomas Gathers and Supervisory Committee Chair, Cornelia Simmons,. voted for reinstatement of the President. Before the investigation was ever conducted, Mrs. Harris-Brooks knew she would fight for the President's reinstatement. Unlike all other employees who are suspended following allegations they have violated credit union policy, Mrs. Harris-Brooks placed Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. on suspension with pay. The gravity of the accusations leveled against him were inconsequential to the corrupt Board Chair. Mrs. Harris-Brooks also issued two letters- one to the victim and the other to the President in which she reduced the accusations against the President as mere humorous though inappropriate repartee encouraged by the victim. 

Three years later, Mrs. Harris-Brooks ordered that the President diffuse the Valencia Branch Manager's allegations against Ms. Walker and dismiss the entire matter to a mere conflict of personalities. Ms. Harris-Brooks' dishonest proclivities have again injured the credit union, leaving it open to yet another lawsuit.  

In 2010Mr. Smock also received complaints from female employees alleging that a former Afro-American Business Development Representative and then Call Center Supervisor, Joseph Garcia, had inappropriately touched them. The two males were counseled by Mr. Smock who may only have chosen to issue warnings because of the 2008 complaint filed against the President.

In 2009 through 2010, the Board Chair had no qualms with the abusive tactics employed by Ms. Walker against employees and she purposely ignored the fact that Ms. Walker's so-called efforts to create profit, were all failing. Despite well documented failures by the COO, during the annual meeting which took place in May 2010, Mrs. Harris-Brooks told attendees that in her opinion and that of the Board, they believed the credit union finally had the "right management team in place." Fourteen months later, Mrs. Harris-Brooks ordered Ms. Walker's termination. 

Beatrice Walker's vendetta against certain employees was provoked by the President. Not only did she create greater divisiveness but she intentionally fostered discord amongst staff members and created an environment saturated by vicious gossip, strife and intrigue. The decision to finally terminate Ms. Walker was as much an indictment to her chronic failures and abhorrent behaviors as it was to the failures and corrupt nature of the entire Board of Directors and in particular, its Chair, Mrs. Harris-Brooks. 


SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Baby, I’ve been watching you
I want to know you better
I love the way you move and dress
And how you fill that sweater.
When you catch me staring, you always turn away
But I don’t plan on stopping cause I see you as my prey.
It’s time you change the way you think cause I plan to make you mine
You know that I can’t help myself, you’re always looking fine.
The law says its illegal and I will get in trouble
But no law is gonna stop me
Nor going to burst my bubble.



"When a worker complains about 
harassment, you take it seriously." 

Carol Thorpe
Automobile Club of Southern California


On May 15, 2012, poster and credit union insider, Priority MC wrote, "There is no lawsuit from Suzanna like you keep saying." She lied. Shown below is the summons ordered to be served on former COO, Beatrice Walker, in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager. 


  image
image
image


The summons also dispels verbalizations made by President Wiggington; Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks; Director, O. Glen Saffold; and AVP, Yvonne Boutte, denying that a lawsuit has ever been or will ever be filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager.

The President has recently disclosed that the credit union's attorneys, Richardson Harmon Ober PC  have also promised they will defeat the latest lawsuit if it goes to trial. If they in fact said this, it's both inappropriate and unproven to be true. The attorneys are beginning to sound more and more, like bottom feeders. 

Based on the tactics resorted to during litigation of the first and second lawsuits, we expect the law firm to resort to once again employ mud slinging design to impugn the character of the Plaintiff. When attorney's lack intellect and are devoid of moral compass, then attacking Plaintiff characters is certainly appropriate. 

So how will they contend with the fact Beatrice Walker was terminated for insubordination? How will they handle the fact she openly and arrogantly violated policies, laws, and employees? 



 THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING

Linda Nisely vs. Priority One Credit Union
image
 

SETTLED AND PENDING CASES

Wrongful Termination (Unlimited) – Amended
Status: Pending
Filing Date: 6/18/2012
Location: Stanley Mosk
Plaintiff: Former Valencia Branch Manager


Other Employment Complaint
Status: Pending
Filing Date: 6/08/2012
Location: Stanley Mosk
Plaintiff: Former Branch Manager


Civil Complaint (Limited)
Status: Pending
Filing Date: 01/23/2012
Location: Pasadena Courthouse
Plaintiff: Member Cross-Complaint


Civil Comp. Other (Limited)
Status: Pending
Filing Date: 1/23/2012
Location” Pasadena Courthouse
Plaintiff: Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance Company


Case Type: Wrongful Termination (Unlimited)
Status: Settled
Date Filed: 5/24/2011
Location: Stanley Mosk
Plaintiff: Former Business Development Rep.


Case Type: Wrongful Termination (Unlimited)
Status: Settled
Date Filed: 8/20/2010
Location: Pasadena Courthouse
Plaintiff: Former Burbank Branch Manager



To be continued.....
# block visitors referred from indicated domains RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} semalt\.com [NC,OR] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} semalt\.com [NC] RewriteRule .* - [F]