Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Federal Employees: You be the Judge


Get real-life reviews of key court cases involving federal employees. Share your opinion on the outcomes of these cases, or participate in other discussions about workplace issues that may impact your job.

Be civil when debating with others in the forum. Uncivil remarks toward any other forum member is prohibited on FederalSoup and should be reported immediately.


To read today's top news stories on federal employee pay, benefits, retirement, job rights and other workplace issues visit FederalDaily.com.

2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
datbehard  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, August 22, 2012 1:11:00 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Anyone with one, or can link to one would be appreciated!!
datbehard  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:30:00 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
LOL......lots of lookers, no helpers.
 
I will be filing a very detailed brief (for OFO Appeal)  in about 45 days, so if i can i will try and get out an outline and how to set it up.
 
In the meantime, if any of you kind people have gone through this and have a good out line, just put XXXX's in all the private parts and post the Brief.
38RR5  
#3 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 12:14:52 AM(UTC)
neice1

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/25/2011(UTC)
Posts: 709

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

datbehard - you probably saw this, but in case you didn't, this is a sample ofo appeal brief:
 
 
freeageless  
#4 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 12:47:20 AM(UTC)
freeageless

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/20/2006(UTC)
Posts: 1,410

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
Datbehard-here is one that I found using Google.   

http://www.afgedist8.org/documents/appeal-sample.DOC

Neice, I would be very careful about relying on anything posted by EEO21. There have been prior posts complaining about EEO21. That is complaints about him taking people's money, and them not helping them.
38RR5  
#5 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 3:44:07 AM(UTC)
neice1

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/25/2011(UTC)
Posts: 709

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)


Okay, thanks.
MgmtGuy  
#6 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 10:59:59 AM(UTC)

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/23/2012(UTC)
Posts: 69

Here's one:

MOTION TO DISMISS

Recognizing that my claims of discrimination are not supported by fact or logic, I voluntarily dismiss my complaint.

Joe Employee
datbehard  
#7 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:48:23 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)

Oosik trolling again. Get a life will you.....sheesh, where do you people come from?

 
 
THANKS Freeagelesss!!......I have plenty of samples, I usually look at cases that are lost and try to discern the WHY's of how the Court shot them down. You learn more that way:)
Just wanted some real life cases. Hard to find, plenty on PACER, but all District Court, which is where I want to be anyways OFO is a joke, like AJ so am gonna do my 180 day pergatory and do a Notice to Sue.
MgmtGuy  
#8 Posted : Thursday, September 6, 2012 9:28:07 PM(UTC)

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/23/2012(UTC)
Posts: 69

The examples you find on PACER are likely to be excellent examples to follow for OFO practice.  Just be sure to find EEOC cases since OFO really doesn't care about any court decisions but will give begrudging recognition of US Supreme Court cases.
datbehard  
#9 Posted : Friday, September 7, 2012 2:16:33 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Doesn't really matter, as OFO is a joke, just as the AJ's are. It's just an Administrative hurdle to get over before getting into District Court. I just like to do things right and I'll end up using most of my OFO brief in District Court. No reason to do a half a** job. OFO is 2-3 yrs. behind so I'm looking to skip these jokers at the 6 month mark.
 
Most AJ's carry six to 10 cases at a time in my District....Just unbelievable...I have absolutely no idea what they do all day. I would love to visit the District Office one day and just walk around. Probably a bunch of assistants sitting around playing FarmVille, with the AJ's down at the watering hole.
Drawing up Motions in a Divorce case for a friend and it's just amazing how fast and efficient the process is. Want to contact the assistant? Phone is online. Want to get an hour with the Judge?....next month will work.
 
I'm 100% convinced the EEO process is set up to defeat the Spirit of the Law, if not the Complainant.
The only thing I've found very distasteful is working with Attorneys. They are such Babies.....I'm dead serious. Took over this guys case and I'm reading all these emails between the opposing Counsel and you'd of thought you were looking at 2 very bright 12 year olds fighting on FaceBook.  You did this, you didn't do that. Blah, blah, blah.......meanwhile the client is getting poorer and poorer.
 
Opposing Counsel wrote up an Order for the Judge and wanted my friend to sign it. He had NO INPUT, even though he was Pro se. I came in around this part. By the time I was done with his little whiny butt he was Motioning Judge to Incarcerate my friend for not signing HIS order, which was totally off base and actually illegal as he was making him withdraw $23,000 from his TSP for back arrears of $7k and the rest for attorney fees. LOL, too funny, he was nice though; said my friend could take $1,000 out for himself. WHAT????........TSP is for child support arrears and Alimony only and this joker even had it stipulated that Husband in future would have to go back to TSP again if his wifes atty. fees got behind again.
We wrote a Motion To Revisit the last hearing. Her attorney won't give us the Court reporter he had during that hearing, so we can buy the minutes to see exactly what was agreed to or not.
End of the day this whiny beatch told my friends girlfriend he was gonna have him arrested for not signing his Order. Then he wrote an email saying the same thing. Then he put it into a Motion with the Judge.
 
My friend is filing charges with the State Bar association on this one.  Thing is, we tried to negotioate in good faith and it had to be his way or Jail. Crazy stuff. Interesting to see what Judge does to our s and his Motions. We wrote up 3, one for a Revisit, one for Prod. of Docs and one for a Deposition.  I also found out through PACER that she had filed Bankruptsy almost a year before they split up. He was going to work, coming home and being a Dad and she was hoarding cash and hiding all the mail that was coming in regarding BK.  Funny thing is, she missed about $2,000 in cash she got from SSDI for her kids (4) and child support from an ex-husband on 2 of them...the older ones.
His attorneys had this case for one year and never knew what I found out in less than an hour. Her financials were Fraud Upon the Court and I hope he takes it up with the State Attorneys office to prodecute her lying on the Chapter 13.
semore  
#10 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 10:34:48 AM(UTC)
cmorebut

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/15/2012(UTC)
Posts: 305



Yep your a real Sherlock Holmes and yet you don't know what a OFO appeals brief looks like. I would imagine based on your posts you like to think you know something and then advise friends who then lose their case
datbehard  
#11 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 10:43:47 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
I know exactly what a brief looks like. I want to see someone else's.
 
The wifey watching TV or is she at her boyfriend's house?.....er, I mean getting her Nails Done:)
datbehard  
#12 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 11:24:04 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Dumaguit v. Potter.......cmorebutt, This is from PACER. Cost 10cents a viewable page. I've viewed thousands of pages. The cost doesn't really matter to me. The "End Product" does.  So when you say, you've heard that before, you don't know me from Adam.
 
For the rest of you that have an "Active" intrest and not just dirtbag TROLLS, this is a very good case. Of course EEOC let him down, but the District Court did not.  This is the first filing, one of many. I have all his Docs saved in PDF. Can't post PDF on this, so ORC'd it and put it into WORD,l thus things are off kilter a little.  Just wanted to give everyone a look at what you can see on PACER. Easy to sign up and use. Youtube Video or even their website has a good tutorial on how to navigate through it.
Also found my friend's wife's Chapter 13 filing on PACER.  You cannot access local or state filings (like Divorce), but anything Federal.....it's there.  I can spend hours on there reading cases, so be careful if you're like me......you may want to set a deadline to get off the computer...to me it's addictive. Guess like trolling is to those other guys. At least my trolling is informative, instead of trying to be a bully after work. LOL.
 

Exhibit A

Case3:06-cv-0202-JSW Document22-1 Fited07/27197 Page2 of 20

-

MARY DRYOVAGE(CA SBN 112551)        1 1

Law Offices ofMary Dryovage  -

600 Harrison Street, Suite 120 San Francisco, CA 94107 Telephone-15) 593-0095 Fax: (415)            0095

E-mail: mdryovageigc.org

Attorney for Plaintiff

UNI'FED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD DUMAGUTT,         6          2042

Plaintiff,

COMPLA1NT - EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE, NATIONAL ORIGIN, DISABILITY AND RETALIATION

JURY TRIAL REOUESTED

EXHIBT          C

WITNESS - __tu1fr

CONSISTINGOf        PAGES

DATE -

BEHMKE REPORTU'jG £ VIDEO SERVICES

NATURE OF THIE ACTION

This action is brought by Plaintiff GERALD DUMAGUIT (hereafter "DUMAGUIT"),

EEO DISPUTE RESOLUTION SPECIALIST, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, einployed by JOHN E. POTTER,, POSTMASTER GENERAL, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE (hereafter "Defendant", "POTTER", or "USPS") for race/ national origin discrimination (Asian/Filipino), disability

discrmiinaxion and retaliation to wit: wrongful discharge, hostile environment, denial of promotions and benefits and refüsal to provide reasonable accommodation and reimburse sick leave ordered by the U.S. Department of Labor.

2.         This action is brought under the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §2000e-16 ei' seq. as

amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. Na. 102-166,105 Stat. 1071 (1991) (Title VII), die Civil Service Reform Act, 5 U.S.C.2101, ei seq. as amended by die Whistleblower

YR 17 FI2:57

ICT COURTi\J1HUI1W          UI C.L1IUWNI1

4X4

V.

JOHN E. POflER, POSTMASTER GENERAL, U. S. POSTAL SERVICE,

Defendant.

8 ik

Dumaguit v. Potier, Postmaster General,

Complaint - Employment Discrimination            Page 1

Case3:06-cv-02042-JSW Docurnent22-1 RIed07/27J07 Page3 of 20

Protection Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 791, as arnended by the Americans With Disabilities Act, and the Declaratory Judgment Act 28 U.S.C. § 2201, et seq. Plaintiff

3 seeks backpay, front pay and compensatory damages, as weil as a declaratoiy judgnient and

4 injunction to restram defendant employer from committing prohibited personnel practices,

policies, custorns and usages, from discriminating and retaliating against plaintiffa.nd other

6 employees ofthe USPS based race, national origin, sex, and/or opposition to unlawful

7 discrimination and retaliation. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief requiring defendant employer to

8 take affirmative and effective steps to remove and otherwise discipline managers who have failed

9 to comply with Title Vii, the Rehabilitation Act and the Civil Service Reform Act. Plaintiff seeks

10 injunctive relief requiring the defendant employer to take specific actions designed, implemented

11 and confirmed by qualified non-government consuhants to ensure that all supervisory employees

12 are adequately trained to identify, investigate and stop situations and complaints. Such specific

13 actions, include, but are not limited to:

14        a.         allocation of significant funding and trained staff to implement all changes within

15        two years;

16        b.         discipline managers who have violated the agency's policies and failed to meet

17        their legal responsibility to promptly investigate complaints arid to take effective

18        action to stop and deter prohibited personnel practices against employees;

19        C.        establishing and strictly measuring EEO compliance as a critical element in every

20        manager's performance standards;

21        d.         creating a process for the prompt investigation of harassment and reprisal

22        complaints separate from the agency's process;

23        e.         mandatory and effective training for all employees and m.anagers on

24        discrimination and retaliation issues, investigations and appropriate corrective

25        actions; and

26        f.          eliminating the bacidog of current EEO cases alleging discrimination, harassment

27        and reprisal.

28

Dumaguit v. Potter, Postmaster General,

Complaint - Employment Discrimination            Page 2

Case3:06-cv-02Q42-JSW Document22-1 FiIed07/27107 Page4 of 20

1          II.

2          JURISIMCTION AN!) VENIIE

3 3.      Thejurisdiction ofthis Court is based upon the Civil Right.s Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.

4 §2000e-16 et seq., 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337, 1343, 1345 and 2401(a), which grant district courts

5 jurisdiction over actions alleging unlawful and discriminatory employment practices by federal

6 agencies and provides forjudiciai review of cases involvmg race, national origin and/or disability

7 discrimination and retaliation. The unlawful practices alleged in this complaint occurred in the

8 County of San Francisco, which is situated in the Northern District of California.

9          III.

10        PLAINTIFF

11 4.    Plaintiff GERALD DUMAGUJT is a citizen of the United States who has been employed

12 as a ACTING MANAGER, NORTFIERN CALIFORNIA EEO COMPLAINTS PROCESSING

13 CENTER, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, by JOHN POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL, U.S.

14 POSTAL SERVICE, in San Francisco, California, for over 26 years, not including four years of

15 military service. His perforrnance was rated satisfactory or better, at all times material to this

16 action.

17        IV.

18        DEFENDANT

19 5.    Defendant JOHN E. POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, is

20 the head of an executive agency within the meaning ofthe Civil Service Reform Act, 5 U.S.C.

21 1065 and the Civil Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16. As such, defendant has the füll

22 responsibility for administration of all programs within the agency, including the employment

23 policies and practices ofthe U.S. POSTAL SERVICE in all regions and is in a position to create

24 and ixnplement a policy to eliminate and prevent any form of discriniination and retaliation and to

25 provide complete relief for plaintiff. Defendant is sued in his official capacity.

26        V.

27        EXHAUSTION QF REMEDIES

28 6.    Plaintiff DUMAGUIT requested EEO counseling on July 31, 2000 regarding his claims of

Dumaguir v. J-'otter, Postmaster General,

Complaint - Employment Discrimination            Page 3

Case3:06-cv-0242-JSW Document22-1 PiIed07/27107 Page5 of 20

hostile work environment, denial of terms and conditions of employment incuding performance

2 evaluation, bonuses, promotions, and posting a "Wanted" type poster containing his picture an

3 the building to prevent his entry, based an bis raGe (Asian), national origin (Philippines) and

4 retaliation, based on bis objections to unlawful actions. A timely formal complaint was filed an

5 September 26, 2000, Case No. FIC-00000008-00. The U.S. Postal Service issued a Final Agency

6 Decision (FAD) on March 8, 2004. A timely appeal to the Equal Ernployment Opportunity

7 Commission, Office ofFederal Operations was filed an April 24, 2004, EEOC No. 370-Al‑

8 x2502. The OFO EEOC Decision on Complaint No.HC-00000008-00 has been pending für

9 approximately two years.

            10 7.    PIairitiffDUMAGTJIT requested EEO counseling on October 5, 2001 regarding bis

11 claims of deriial of reasonable accornmodation, denial of leave request, placed hirn in AWOL

12 status, which cancelled bis medical insurance, denial of EVA (Economic Value Added) bonus,

13 based on bis race (Asian), national origin (Philippines), disabilities and retaliation. He filed a

14 timely formal complaint on January 16,2002, Case Na. HO-0019-02. The Final Agency Decision

15 was received an March 27, 2004. A timely appeal to the Equal Employment Opportunity

16 Comrnission, Office of Federal Operations was fTiled on April 24, 2004, EEOC No. 370-2003-

17 0  1285. The OFO EEOC Decision on Complaint No. HO-0019-02 has been pending für

18 approximately two years.

            19 8.    P1aintiffDUMAGUIT requested EEO counseling on August 23, 2004 regarding bis

20 claims of unlawful separation based on bis disability (constructive discharge), failure to process

21 bis disability reti.rement, refusal to process bis leave buy back hours approved by U.S.

22 Department of Labor Office of Workers Comperisation (OWCP), based on his race (Asian),

23 national ongin (Philippines), disabilities and retaliation. He filed a timely formal complaint on

24 December 28, 2004, Case No. 4F-940-0154-04. The Final Agency Decision (FAD) was received

25 on July 25, 2005. The cornplaint was appealed tu the Equal Employment Opportunity

26 Commission, Office ofFederal Operations, EEOC No. 01A55900. The FAD was rescinded and

27 reissued an December 8, 2005 as a mixed case. On March 8, 2006, the OFO notified plaintiffthat

28 "in its new decision, the agency gave you appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board

Dumaguit v. Potter, Postmaster General,

Complaint - Employment Discrimination            Page 4

Case3.O6-cv-02942-JSW Document22-1 FiIed07/27/07 Page6 of 20

only. Accordingly, this appeal is closed." The FAD was received an December 20, 2005 and

2 provided 90 days to file a civil action in district court.

3 9.      Plaintiff DUMAGTJ1T filed a complaint with the Office of Inspector General for the U.S.

4 Postal Service an March 10, 2003 concerning interference in the Postal Service EEO process by

5 USPS managers in Labor Relations and the Law Department, which were previously brought to

6 the attention of Bernadine Faison, Manager of the Compliance and Appeals. Plaintiff

7 1 DUMAGUIT also sent letters concerning these complaints to his Senators, Barbara Boxer and

8 Diane Feinstein, which were forwarded to the USPS for action. Over 180 days has elapsed since

9 the filing of this OIG complaint and no final action ha.s been taken.

10        VI.

11        STATEMENT OF FACTS

12 10.  PIaintiffDtJMAGUIT is a member ofa protected group based an bis race (Asian),

13 national origin (Philippines), disabilities and in retaliation for protectec! activity (fihing EEO

14 complaints and opposmg unlawful practices).

15 11.  Plajntiff DIJMAGUIT fully exhausted his administrative remedies for Case Na. 1-IC‑

16 00000008-00, Case No. HO-00 19-02, and Case No. 4F-940-0154-04.

17 12.  Plaintiff DUMAGLTIT served in the Air Force from July 1973 until June 1977 and was

18 honorably discharged. He was hired as a Machine Distribution Cierk at the San Francisco Post

19 Office in 1978. He was promoted to a Supervisor, Distribution Operations in 1986 and

20 subsequently was promoted to an EEC Counselor/Investigator in 1997. In 1999, he was detailed

21 to Acting Manager, EEO Complaints Processing Center, Richmond, California. In 2000, he was given a direeted reassigninent as EEO Dispute Resolution Specialist.

23 13.  At all times material to this action, P1aintiffDUMAGUIT received performance ratings of

24 satisfactory or better, including an "Outstanding" rating in 1998.

25 14.  At all times material to this action, defendant took no disciplinary action against Plaintiff

26 DUMAGIJ1T and had no valid documented criticism of bis work.

27        DENIAL OF PROMOTION AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES

28

Dumaguil v. Potter, Postmaster General,

Complaint - Employment Discrimination            Page 5

Case3:06-cv-02042-JSW Document22-1 f:i1ed07127107 Page7 of 20

15. Defendant POTTER, througb his agents, discriminated against Plaintiff DTJMAGU1T in

2 terms and conditions of employment, including but not limited to performance evaluations,

3 bonuses, and promotions. Similarly situated employees not in Plaintiff's protected group were

4 protnoted to positions that the plaintiff was denied.

Back to top
freeageless  
#13 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:41:08 PM(UTC)
freeageless

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/20/2006(UTC)
Posts: 1,410

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
cmorebut wrote:


Yep your a real Sherlock Holmes and yet you don't know what a OFO appeals brief looks like. I would imagine based on your posts you like to think you know something and then advise friends who then lose their case


Cmorebut-yes. I know you. Typical management lap dog. You should change your sign in name from seemorebut to reflect who you really are which is kissmorebut. Isn't that what you do a lot of?
MgmtGuy  
#14 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 11:06:19 PM(UTC)

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/23/2012(UTC)
Posts: 69

Free, again, what is with the harsh personal comments and attacks?  Chill out!
38RR5  
#15 Posted : Saturday, September 8, 2012 11:57:30 PM(UTC)
neice1

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/25/2011(UTC)
Posts: 709

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
What the government did to Dumaquit is unbelievable.  We need less govt!

civilservicechange.org/?p=430
 

datbehard  
#16 Posted : Sunday, September 9, 2012 12:46:46 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Oosik, seemorebutt (now referred to me by Isabutt) certainly is posting deragatory remarks and one-liner put downs. Free, I and anyone else can be harsh and critical to someone who brings nothing to a Topic. 
freeageless  
#17 Posted : Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:34:34 AM(UTC)
freeageless

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/20/2006(UTC)
Posts: 1,410

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
datbehard wrote:
Oosik, seemorebutt (now referred to me by Isabutt) certainly is posting deragatory remarks and one-liner put downs. Free, I and anyone else can be harsh and critical to someone who brings nothing to a Topic. 


Datbehard, the thing that I always noticed about the many Oosik/Mgmt lapdogs and their managers that really used to bug me before I retired, was their utter arrogance-their condescending attitude. We see that attitude right here in their posts. That kept me fighting the Oosik's every step of the way. I was determined to hit them first, fast and hard. I always did my best to hit them first with voluminous Freedom of Information Act Requests, discovery requests, motion requests and summary judgment motions. I was determined to nail them before they got me. The many Oosiks' attitude was why doesn't Free roll over and die. I did not roll over and die. After all we as management and management lackeys have screwed over thousands, tens of thousands of federal employees. We have cheated thousands and thousands of federal employees out of jobs and promotions. They may have filed a little old EEO complaint. They may even have taken it a couple of steps-but they eventually dropped it. Why hasn't Free dropped his. That SOB doesn't even have a lawyer, and he now has us in federal district court before a federal judge.

However, Oosiks' I do owe you now a debt of gratitude. Because of your actions, I am now able to go on luxury vacations around the world. Thank you so much for all that money in settlements that you paid me on behalf of management's corrupt practices and unconstitutional conduct.

freeageless2012-09-09 10:44:01
datbehard  
#18 Posted : Sunday, September 9, 2012 3:12:00 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 431

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Nicely put Free. I believe these two Oosik and Isabutt are only on here as paid shills to stop employees asserting their rights.
 
I'm gonna stretch it a bit and even say they may work for a Govt. contractor to post negatives to discourage people.  I know this thing goes on in the Financial Message Boards where there are paid shills to put down a certain stock along with their management for the SHORTS to make money when the stock falls.
freeageless  
#19 Posted : Sunday, September 9, 2012 3:26:58 AM(UTC)
freeageless

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/20/2006(UTC)
Posts: 1,410

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
I saw the quote below, I don't remember where which may best sum up these Mgmt_Guys.

"A vain Emperor who cares for nothing hires two swindlers that promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid". The Emperor cannot see the cloth himself, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing unfit for his position; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor marches in procession before his subjects, who play along with the pretense, until a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor cringes, suspecting the assertion is true, but continues the procession."
semore  
#20 Posted : Sunday, September 9, 2012 10:54:14 AM(UTC)
cmorebut

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/15/2012(UTC)
Posts: 305



freeglass I saw you on a recent cruise rowing a jon boat
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 0.241 seconds.