This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: tatives stated that they would begin investigating Vickers' complaints
immediately. In connection with the investigation, Vickers asserts that Anderson, Dixon
and Mueller, among others, were interviewed.
FMC's counsel informed Vickers' attorney at the conclusion of the interview that FMC
did not believe that Vickers had a "legally actionable claim" against them. Shortly
thereafter, Vickers met with the human resources department at FMC, where he learned
that Anderson, Dixon and Mueller had been suspended for staggered periods as a result
of FMC's investigation into Vickers' complaints. Vickers was told that human resources
would attempt to rearrange Vickers' schedule in order to minimize his contact with
Anderson, Mueller, and Dixon. Vickers was also informed during this meeting that the
investigation had revealed actionable misconduct by Vickers, but that human resources
had elected not to pursue any action against him in light of the harassment Vickers had
experienced. Vickers claims that human resources refused to provide specific information
regarding Vickers' alleged misconduct despite his request.
Vickers asserts that, contrary to the statements of human resources regarding a schedule
shift, he continued to work closely with Anderson, Dixon and Mueller. Vickers contends
that Dixon and Mueller were openly hostile toward him during this time period. Despite
human resources' instructions to all involved parties to keep Vickers' complaint
confidential, word of the situation spread. Vickers met with human resources again and
was assured that appropriate action would be taken. A few days later, Anderson informed
Vickers that his request to transfer shifts had been denied. Soon thereafter, Anderson
informed Vickers that he was required to meet with the human resources department.
Vickers was told by a co-worker that the meeting was for the purpose of initiating a
personnel action against him "in order to discredit him" if he filed a lawsuit against FMC.
Vickers attempted to discern from human resources whether the meeting was for
disciplinary purposes. He was told that it was in fact a disciplinary meeting and that he
was informed that he was not allowed to have...
View Full Document
- Spring '08