Anarchy, Part 1

ANOTHER DISMAL YEAR

Priority One Credit Union’s Monthly Income Statements and quarterly Financial Performance Reports (“FPR”) prove the credit union will end the year in the negative. This doesn't come as a surprise when one considers that in a desperate effort to remain solvent, President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. at the request of state auditors, ordered closure of the Redlands and Valencia branches less than 60-days ago.

It is also become obvious that COO, Beatrice Walker, who was hired on June 1, 2009, is proving incapable of resolving the problems created by the President which have thrust the credit union into a continual cycle of financial losses. At a salary in excess of $100,000 per year, one can only wonder if she’s worth the money she’s being paid.

This is a President who has managed over a three-year period, to unravel the accomplishments made by the credit union’s many Presidents and staffs since opening it’s doors for business in 1926.

His AVP sector, his $600,000 telephone system, his elimination of the marketing department, his installation of a marketing committee, his hiring of a COO and many other blunders have all ebbed away at the credit union’s once strong financial foundation and have injured Priority One’s public reputation. 

If Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was intent on placing Priority One into a state of regression, then he’s succeeded.

Accusations filed against the President in 2008, that he sexually harassed a former employee, were proven to be true and thanks to Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, the violations of state and federal law were invalidated and reduced by the corrupt Mrs.  Harris-Brooks to a mere conflict of personalities.

It was also Mrs. Harris-Brooks who led the Directors into authorizing obtainment of a $20 million loan from the credit union’s line-of-credit which was used to increase the amount of the credit union’s asset size on paper. It was a decision fueled by pride and ego and purely superficial and it forced the credit union to pay between $30,000 and more than $50,000 per month in interest, alone.

The President also orchestrated the hiring of his long-time friend and associate, Beatrice Walker. According to the President, he hired her to serve as the credit union’s first COO so that she could takeover projects he was too busy to contend to, to help create new streams of business and to help drive out employees he had labeled his enemies.

However, the President’s plans seem to have been derailed by Ms. Walker, herself. Following her arrival at the credit union, she realized that Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. is not, in her words, “President material.” She quickly created alliances with then Director of Credit Resolutions, Yvonne Boutte, and Joseph Garcia. Mrs. Boutte and Mr. Garcia would later reveal that Ms. Walker had plans to displace the President and that they would each serve as vice presidents under her new regime.

JINX

So what has Ms. Walker actually achieved? She’s terminated lots of employees, many who she branded “the blogger”, “bloggers” and “friends of the blogger.”

• She also installed a call center that she described as a one-stop center but which has not only failed to live up to her hype but has aggravated complaints citing poor member service. 

• She also succeeded in hiring her business associates, Saeid Raad, and IT Manager, Randy McBride. 

• She’s reduced working hours, eliminated overtime and converted many full-time staff to part-time status and with the conversion, eliminated their medical and retirement benefits. 

• She’s introduced Courtesy Pay, an overdraft protection program and without first obtaining authorization from members, automatically added it to all accounts. Courtesy Pay has forced many members into collection proceedings. Is this how Priority One helps members win with money? 

• Ms. Walker charged a $5000 laptop to the credit union credit card. 

• Her version of a payday loan, titled Skip-a-Pay, crashed and burned but remains listed in the credit union’s portfolio of products. 

• She and the President have manipulated financial reporting. 

• She has been accused of creating a hostile working environment, of retaliation and harassment, of same-sex harassment, and of stalking a former branch manager. 

• She has reduced budgets critical to marketing and business development. 

• In recent months Ms. Walker determined with the assistance of Director of Project Management, Yvonne Boutte, that the credit union would begin selling VISA Gift Cards. Ms. Walker ordered the printing of promotional materials, research, and the creation of t-shirts to be worn by employees, on which were printed the word "VISA." Unfortunately, after spending had been conducted, her plan fizzled resulting in yet another waste of money. 

Unbeknownst to many employees, Ms. Walker has numerous secondary part-time jobs with other companies including Williams-Sonoma located at 142 S. Lake Street, Pasadena, California.  Ms. Walker is an avid fan and frustrated, interior designer who studied interior design at the College of the Canyons in Santa Clarita, California.

Because of her part-time positions at other companies, she often arrives late to work and leaves early. She being paid more than $100,000 per year to work part-time. She also signed an agreement when she was hired by the credit union in which she promised not to work for any other company where the work could prove to be a conflict of interest. Isn't it a conflict of interest that due to her extracurricular jobs that she only works part-time at Priority One? 

PLUMMETING

Contrary to President Wiggington's periodic declarations to success, Priority One Credit Union is a credit union that is clearly, not "winning with money." Excerpts from it's September/October Income Statement record immense losses which serve to dispel any insistence by the credit union that things are progressively well. Clearly, they're not. 

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 

BLAST FROM THE PAST

The following record provides the amount of Total Net Income attained by the credit union at the end of each quarter in 2006. This was the last year in which William E. Harris served as President and CEO.

Quarter Ending March 2006: $163,502,140.00

Quarter Ending June 2006: $164,358,374.00

Quarter Ending September 2006: $173,252,329.00

Quarter Ending December 2006: $172,250,649.00

The above-shown amounts were achieved without prior to Priority One’s participation in Shared Branching or obtainment of a $20 million loan from the credit union’s line-of-credit. Furthermore, at the time of his retirement, Mr. Harris had just completed a merger with former Inland Counties Postal Credit Union of Riverside County. The merger was but one of several successfully completed by Mr. Harris during his tenure and which increased both the credit union’s member base and the amount of its Asset size.

EVIDENCE

Late last year, President Wiggington began telling some employees of the South Pasadena branch that at no time was he ever accused of sexual harassment. Some employees actually believed him. 

The accusations were submitted to then credit union attorney, William Adler. Mr. Adler contacted the Board who contracted the services of EXTTI, Inc. The President was suspended with pay by the Board and after about six weeks, a meeting was conducted in South Pasadena in which the investigator provided evidence proving the President sexually harassed a former employees. The detective also recommended the President's termination. Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, would have none of it and with the help of Directors, O. Glen Saffold and Thomas Gathers, and Supervisory Committee Chair, Cornelia Simmons, voted for the reinstatement of the law-breaking President.

If it wasn't for former Director, Janice Irving, we may never have learned that the President was found guilty of sexual harassment, that the detective recommended his termination or that she and Director, Joe Marchica, voted for his termination. 

This is the first time that we publish documentation proving President Wiggington was accused of sexual harassment and an investigation conducted. It should dispel his "stories" concocted to vindicate himself. 

A letter written by Mrs. Harris-Brooks, describing the her determination that she and the Board determined sexual harassment had not occurred as defined under federal law, served to further victimize the President's accuser. 

Below is a memorandum issued by Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock, informing all employees that the President would be away from the company temporarily on personal time off ("PTO"). 

 

The following form was issued by investigator, Scott Barer, to each employee he interviewed during his investigation of the President. Please not the inclusion of language which states that the employment of employees will not be affected. At no fault of EXTTI, Inc., the protection offered under the statement was insufficient for the President to carryout campaigns which resulted in the terminations of many employees. Also, following conclusion of the investigation, Vice President, Rodger Smock, at the request of Chairperson, Diedra Harris-Brooks, reported the former employee to CUNA following writing of a bad check.  

Here is the copy of Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks's letter which responds to allegations lodged against the President. The document constitutes an intentional circumvention of ethics by the unscrupulous Board Chair, and ignorant Board of Directors to cover-up an egregious violation of federal law committed by the President. 

In the first page of her letter, Diedra Harris-Brooks states that :"given our understanding of the circumstances, we do not believe the nature of the exchanges rises to the level of [having created] an unlawful, hostile working environment." 

Apparently, Mrs. Harris-Brooks is not very astute. If she were, she might be able to comprehend that creation of a hostile working environment is but one factor used in determining whether sexual harassment has occurred. In the case of this employee, she was terminated after being sexually harassed for a number of years.

Mrs. Harris-Brooks' ability to delve decisions that are compliant to policies and laws is impeded by her dishonest proclivities. She is a horrendous Board Chair who has proven incapable of comprehending the credit union's financial reports, how then is she qualified to comprehend the nuances found in federal law? 

In 2007, Mrs. Harris-Brooks revealed just how corrupt she is when she persecuted a Diector who obtained evidence that then AVP, Liz Campos had sustained more than 40 separate 40 NSF incidents to her Priority One checking account during the months of October 2006 through the first week of January 2007. At the time most of the incidents occurred, Mrs. Campos was a Branch Manager and despite her abuses, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. deemed it prudent to promote her to AVP and reverse every NSF fee incurred as a result of her abuses. An investigation proved Mrs. Campos had been kiting which is a federal offense and the President was ordered to terminate her employment. 

Despite the fact federal law had been violated, an incensed Mrs. Harris-Brooks threatened the Director who exposed the illegal acts perpetrated by the AVP and warned that in the future, she was to be given any evidence that exposed management personnel of violating federal law. Why would anyone do that? Mrs. Harris-Brooks is not an attorney.She is not a legal expert. She is not a licensed investigator. She's not even a competent Board Chair. 

In her letter to the President, Ms. Harris-Brooks continues by stating, “Nevertheless, the Board of Directors is very concerned that the conduct alleges is not consistent with the Credit Union’s standards of conduct.”  Is this woman a dolt? If the Board determined that they did not "believe the nature of the exchanges (between the President and his victim) attained a level deemed unlawful or which contributed to the creation of a hostile work environment" then why would the Board be "very concerned" about the President's behavior? Mrs. Harris-Brooks isn't even competent at being dishonest. 

Continuing, Mrs. Harris-Brooks states the President must conduct himself in a manner consistent to credit union standards and policies. We invite Mrs. Harris-Brooks to provide us with a documented record approved by the Board which describes the alleged standard of conduct the President is required to abide to. Mrs. Harris-Brooks is dishonest so can we assume the standard she alludes to involves some level of dishonesty? 

And when one considers the abhorrent behaviors demonstrated by President Wiggington, Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock; Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval; and former COO, Beatrice Walker, it is nothing less than incredible that Priority One has a documented standard of conduct that executives are expected to abide to. 

Mrs. Harris-Brooks' message is witless and a lame attempt up covering up a violation of federal law. She makes one reference to an "office holiday party" during which the President stood up, removed his belt and loudly informed the female employee that "I'm gonna whip that ass", "you know you want me to whip that ass", and "come here so I can whip that ass." That was only one of dozens similar incidents that occurred over a period of years. 

Mrs. Harris-Brooks also instructs the President to be aware of the credit union's "Unlawful Harassment policies." Why, wasn't he aware that the credit union has a policy in place forbidding sexual harassment or that sexual harassment is against the law?  Mrs. Harris-Brooks felt impelled to include this statement in her letter because she was present when the detective declared that Mr. Wiggington had indeed sexually harassed a former employee.

 

Mrs. Harris-Brooks informs President Wiggington that she and the Board will be “monitoring this situation.” What situation? Didn’t she state sexual harassment never occurred? And what actual documented proof exists that either she or the Board ever monitored the “situation.” Were follow-up inquiries ever conducted? If so, on what dates and what findings were obtained from their inquiries? Despite her initial conclusion that no wrong doing occurred, after mailing of a letter to Mr. Wiggington and another to the grievant, the former employee filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. In response, the Board presented two offers over a seven (7) month period, one in the amount of $20,000 and the second in the amount of $40,000, both of which were declined by the former employee. Why offer to pay the employee money to settle her claim if no wrong doing was committed by President Wiggington? In fact, when Mrs. Harris-Brooks called the President to advise him that the former employee would be offered money to settle her claim, President Wiggington loudly exclaimed, “Just offer her the money. I want her off my back!” Odd response from an allegedly innocent man. Mrs. Harris-Brooks letter is filled with inconsistencies and she admits he committed wrong doing but possibly due to her lack of ethics, decided he was worth retaining and in the end, she was a participant in committing a travesty of justice and contributed to the decline and deterioration of a once proud and promising credit union. 

Mrs. Harris-Brooks informs President Wiggington that she and the Board will be “monitoring this situation.” What situation? Didn't she state sexual harassment never occurred? And what actual documented proof exists that either she or the Board ever monitored the “situation.” Despite her conclusion that no violation of federal law ever occurred, after mailing of a letter to Mr. Wiggington, the President's victim filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. 

When the Board received the complaint and a 10-page complaint from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing the Board moved quickly and offered $20,000 to the victim to settle her case. Why would the Board offer $20,000 if the President were truly innocent of sexual harassment? Because he was guilty and they knew that if the case proceeded to court, the evidence gathered by the investigator would be used to prove that Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was guilty of all the charges. 

The Board's initial offer was declined and Mrs. Harris-Brooks called the President on his cellular to inform that the offer had been declined. Exasperated, the President yelled, "Just offer her the money. I want her ["the victim"] off my back." Mrs. Harris-Brooks once again contacted the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, this time offering $40,000 to settle the complaint. Interesting that neither the President or Board Chair have any problem using the credit union's financial resources to resolve problems caused the President's insidious tendencies.  

THEFT OF $60,000

Priority One has decided to seek the prosecution of a former receptionist once assigned to the Los Angeles branch ["LAPDC"]. In late 2009, an audit performed by external auditor, Turner, Warren, Hwang and Conrad discovered the former employee absconded with approximately approximately $60,000 pillaged from member accounts. 

The President and then COO, Beatrice Walker, were told by Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, that the credit union could not afford the incident to become public. Our publication of the incident forced the Board Chair to change her mind and now, the credit union has decided to proceed with prosecution. How any credit union could even consider to try dismiss the incident is almost unimaginable but this is a company populated by corrupt officers. 

BREAKING THE RULES HARRIS-BROOKS STYLE

The following letter was signed by Board of Directors, Chairperson, Diedra Harris-Brooks, and mailed to member, Jeffrey Chen, requesting that he respond to the board’s “acknowledgment correspondence” and “application” so that he run as a candidate for a seat on the Board of Directors during last year’s election. Mr. Chen was initially approached by Board member, Bobby Thomas, who is also an officer of the National Letter Carriers Association, Branch 24, and asked to run a seat on the Board. The actual intent of Mr. Thomas, who is the only carbon copied in Mrs. Harris-Brooks letter, was  to impede the chances of candidate, David L. Davidson, from winning a seat on the Board. For those who may have forgotten, Mr. Davidson had once served as a Board member and is the Director who received an anonymous letter exposing an AVP personally appointed by President Wiggington, and who had committed kiting, a federal offense.

Mr. Davidson responsibly submitted the letter to credit union attorney, William Adler who contacted the Board and President Wiggington and ordered an audit of the AVP’s checking account. Incensed that Mr. Davidson submitted the letter to attorney, Adler, Mrs. Harris-Brooks chastised Mr. Davidson during a Board meeting, admonishing him for not having first presented the letter to the Board and allowed them to resolve the problem. Mrs. Harris-Brooks may have forgotten that neither she or any member of the Board is qualified to dispense a decision regarding a punishable offense under state law and that none of them are licensed attorneys.

In the case of the 2009 election, Mrs. Harris-Brooks violated state law when she accepted Mr. Chen’s letter after the date had expired when all applications could be submitted. Here is her letter to Mr. Chen:

The rampant business and legal problems festering at the credit union may have been caused by the President but were enabled by the credit union's corrupt and ignorant Board and it's heinous Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. The amoral Chair has spent years hiding evidence of unethical and criminal behavior but fortunately, it was Director, Janice Irving, the only honest Director on the Board at the time the President was investigated, who disclosed that a detective had gathered evidence proving the President sexually harassed a former employee. It was the Chair and four of her lackeys who decided ignoring federal laws and hiding evidence was both prudent and good for the credit union, for members, and for employees.

Kindly Share The Love»»

Tweet

Save on Delicious