#retaliation

I recently returned to work after taking FMLA leave. Within my first week back, my manager began closely scrutinizing my schedule, availability, and office presence.

He asked me to specify my working hours, identify my usual desk location, and notify him whenever I sit at a different seat. He has also questioned where I am and made comments about my availability. This level of monitoring feels noticeably different from how things were before my leave.

More recently, I was verbally reprimanded for taking time off using my remaining PTO. On the first day of return from FMLA I did mention I may need to use my PTO and I gave him 3 weeks of notice for my PTO. He said as a new director (I was hired as an individual contributor) in the team, I should explain what happens to my projects when I take time off. That I should obtain his permission before applying for leave. That I should come up with a strategy and plan on how my work should be done and who should do it. I’m new to the team (6 months).

I explained that I already gave him a heads-up on my first day of return, and I'm an individual contributor, not a manager, and that I am entitled to use my available PTO. I understand that I have a responsibility to document project status, communicate outstanding tasks, and provide handover information. However, I felt that the conversation was more about making me feel guilty for taking time off.
He hasn't given me a great performance review this year.

The working relationship was already strained before my leave. Now I feel constantly watched, questioned, and evaluated. I dread going to work and find myself overanalyzing his messages and interactions.

Could this sudden increased scrutiny indicate that the manager together with HR is documenting to let me go?

Even if you bailed out the entire project the day before, some are ready to throw you under the bus the following day. And I'm talking about people here, not in Europe, not in Asia. Right here at home. They are untouchable and they keep passing it down the line without caring how much you'll end up with. Just a bunch of a--holes expecting you to break your own back so they can get their big bonuses.

After much deliberation, I have decided to sue my manager and Fannie Mae, both. I fought hard with myself over this, and I seriously considered taking the severance money and staying quiet. After all, I need the money. But I have decided to move forward for the following reasons:

1. I am established in my field, and it is wrong for me to be laid off from my full-time position while Fannie Mae continues to hire contractors an full-timers.
2. My manager is a bully. Over the last year, he has forced four "senior" managers out of the organization. He did the same thing over the previous five years, shrinking his organization from 100 people to 10. He got away with all these.
3. I reported my manager’s erratic behavior to him directly and to his manager, a senior vice president, on two occasions. No action was taken.
4. I kept a detailed log of his bullying, name-calling, and erratic behavior.
5. I applied for internal positions and was close to receiving an offer. My manager could not accept the idea of me moving to another team with a promotion, and he was afraid others would learn more about his behavior.

Signing the severance agreement would prevent me from suing my manager or Fannie Mae. I want change. I want common sense to prevail, and I want others to benefit from my doing the right thing.

There's a lot of tension here because people never know whether speaking up or making a mistake will come back to hurt them. Meanwhile, certain employees seem to get away with things others are punished for. It's difficult to trust management when the rules don't appear to apply equally. I don't know how anyone expects people to do their best work under those conditions.

The most passive-aggressive sh-t from the top. They didn't like what we said and it's payback time, bi--h.

Has anyone suffered consequences for writing something critical in the comment boxes?

This week they spent a fortune pretending employees matter while cutting benefits, threatening jobs, and spreading fear. Attendance is “voluntary,” but absences were noted, employees out aren’t spared, and those who speak up became targets. Nothing says “we value our people” like an overpriced pep rally wrapped in intimidation. Smile, applaud, ignore the hypocrisy, and remember your lines: “Thank you, sir. May I have another?” At Crown, respect is optional, but gratitude is mandatory it’s not a monarchy it’s communism at its finest disguised as a company.

A cautionary tale for anyone considering an anonymous HR complaint: An engineer reported a workplace concern through the company’s HR system, expecting confidentiality. Soon after, my incompetent manager (Yes we have more managers than engineers) began excluding them from meetings, piling on unrealistic deadlines, and criticizing their performance. The engineer kept a dated record of each incident and saved relevant messages, then reported the suspected retaliation through the appropriate channels.

If you speak up, document what happens afterward and keep copies of relevant communications. An anonymous report may not guarantee that your identity stays unknown, so consider the risks and seek independent advice if you face retaliation.

The summit this week to reset the E&I Department is less of a strategic breakthrough and more of a desperate exercise in corporate CYA. After twelve long months of toxic management, ignored warnings, and immense personal strain placed on frontline staff, leadership is attempting to sweep a year of chaos under the rug with a single meeting. But true ethical leadership isn't about deflecting blame when things collapse, it requires genuine responsibility. You cannot hold an honest reset while refusing to acknowledge how we got here, who enabled the crisis, or who is still sitting at the table.

Hosting a reset meeting is a farce when leadership ignores the actual timeline of events. For an entire year, investigators were pushed to their absolute limits under unrealistic deadlines, while HR took months of internal and external reviews just to conclude what everyone on the ground already knew: CJM was a terrible fit. To add insult to injury, every employee who bravely raised a concern was met with zero follow-up and total silence.

How does it make any sense to host a reset summit when the very leaders who enabled and drove this toxic environment (SV, LW, MZ) are sitting right there in attendance? While frontline team members faced retaliation and targeted pressure for speaking up, CJM, SV, LW, MZ operated with full protection. You simply cannot repair a broken culture alongside the people who broke it.

What happened here is every company’s worst-case scenario: employees crying out for help while leadership turns a blind eye. Team members endured horrific psychological strain, spending sleepless nights wondering if they would even have a job tomorrow. Meanwhile, executives sat back protected, collected their paychecks, and cashed out their stock options while money and a full year of progress went down the drain.

This was an executive leadership failure from the top down, starting with CK. If leadership actually wants to heal this department then CK must open the summit with a real apology, admit he protected a so-called expert at the expense of the team, and step aside if he can't fix it. The new interim E&I Officer must be given unfiltered access to every complaint directly, bypassing executive summaries.

Ultimately, an institutional "reset" cannot be considered credible when it refuses to address the root causes of the crisis, the leadership failures that enabled it, or the continued presence of those responsible at the decision-making table. True organizational restoration requires more than performative gestures; it demands full transparency, decisive corrective action, and executive-level accountability. Until leadership moves beyond empty rhetoric and confronts these systemic failures directly, this summit remains a superficial exercise in damage control rather than a genuine path toward structural reform.

How does that work?

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is demanding answers about what Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) alleges may be retaliation by leading pharmacy benefit managers against supporters of PBM legislation.

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/insurance/mh-optum-rx-express-scripts-cvs-caremark-house-probe/

Company: We have Zero tolerance for Workplace bullying

Employees: My Manager is bullying me.

HR: We've received some feedback about your negative remarks at the company

https://www.reddit.com/r/EEOC/comments/1x22okg/employment_lawsuit_settled_for_175000/

A Washington-based nonprofit that operates a hotline for reporting immigration enforcement actions has laid off over half of its staff. The Washington Immigrant Solidarity Network (WAISN) cited significant fundraising challenges over the past year as the primary reason for the extensive cuts. These layoffs have impacted essential services, including hotline operators and rapid-response coordinators, leading to reduced operating hours for the hotline. A newly formed union claims that many of the terminated employees were union supporters, alleging retaliatory actions by leadership. Despite the reduced capacity, WAISN states that core resources for immigrant communities will continue to be available.

Seattle, Washington

https://www.opb.org/article/2026/10/05/washington-nonprofit-that-runs-ice-reporting-hotline-lays-off-more-than-half-its-staff/

Dear Ethics and Compliance Team,
I am submitting this complaint in good faith to request a confidential and independent review of concerns that have been raised by employees regarding workplace culture, leadership practices, potential conflicts of interest, and organizational governance within the DXE organization.
My intention is not to allege misconduct or wrongdoing by any individual. Rather, I am requesting that the company objectively assess these concerns and determine whether all applicable policies, compliance requirements, ethical standards, and governance processes have been appropriately followed.
Over the past several months, there has been a noticeable increase in employee concern regarding the overall work environment, management practices, decision-making processes, and the perceived ability of employees to raise concerns without fear of retaliation. These concerns have been discussed internally among employees and have also appeared in public forums and employee discussions.
Individuals Frequently Referenced in Employee Discussions
Employees have publicly raised concerns involving members of DXE leadership, including:
• IT VP and people he brought in.
• Other leaders referenced in employee discussions and public postings
I am not asserting that any of these individuals have violated company policy. However, the frequency with which these concerns are raised has created sufficient concern among employees that many believe an independent review would be beneficial.
Publicly Available References
The following publicly available sources have been referenced by employees in discussions relating to potential outside business interests, consulting activities, and professional relationships:

Sources:
• https://ca.ltddir.com/Agent/Surya+Nalluri/
• https://www.bizprofile.net/ca/eastvale/zenith-technology-services-llc
• https://www.bizprofile.net/ca/irvine/prosum-it-solutions
https://cafepharma.com/boards/threads/layoffs.706325/

These references have contributed to employee questions regarding whether all appropriate conflict-of-interest reviews, disclosures, approvals, and governance processes have been completed and documented.
Workplace Culture and Fear of Retaliation
One of the most significant concerns expressed by employees relates to the current workplace culture and a perceived fear of retaliation.
Numerous employees have stated that they are reluctant to challenge decisions, provide candid feedback, raise concerns, or offer alternative viewpoints because they fear negative career consequences. Employees have expressed concerns regarding potential exclusion from projects, diminished advancement opportunities, negative performance evaluations, reassignment of responsibilities, or termination.
Many employees report that the environment has become increasingly stressful and intimidating, resulting in a culture where individuals may feel compelled to agree with leadership decisions regardless of their professional judgment. Employees have indicated that they believe dissenting opinions are often unwelcome and that questioning decisions may place them at risk.
Several employees have also described interactions with leadership as aggressive, confrontational, or intimidating. Employees have reported instances in which leaders allegedly raised their voices, publicly criticized individuals, Create a TOXIC workplace,or communicated in a manner that employees perceived as threatening or demeaning. Whether intentional or not, these interactions have reportedly contributed to a workplace atmosphere characterized by fear, anxiety, and reduced psychological safety.
As a result, many employees no longer feel comfortable engaging in open discussions, raising concerns, or participating in constructive debate. Several employees have expressed concerns that this environment discourages transparency, limits open communication, and inhibits effective decision-making.
If an investigation is conducted, I believe that individual discussions with peers and leaders who work closely with this VP would provide valuable insight into these concerns. In a confidential setting, many employees would likely feel more comfortable sharing their experiences and perspectives regarding the workplace environment and leadership practices.

Leadership Influence on Product and Delivery Teams
Employees have stated that product, engineering, and delivery personnel may feel pressured to support decisions made by senior leadership without meaningful discussion, challenge, or independent evaluation.
Many employees believe there is an expectation that decisions originating from senior leadership should be accepted without substantial questioning, even when technical teams have concerns regarding feasibility, risk, implementation, or long-term business impact.
This perception has created concerns regarding the independence of decision-making processes and the ability of subject matter experts to provide objective recommendations. Employees have expressed concern that decisions may sometimes be driven by hierarchy rather than collaborative evaluation of available information.
Employee Concerns Regarding Job Security
A recurring concern expressed by employees involves job security and uncertainty regarding future staffing decisions.
Many employees report feeling that their employment may be at risk if they disagree with leadership decisions, raise concerns, or fail to align with expectations. This perception has contributed to increased anxiety and declining morale across multiple teams.
In particular, some employees have expressed concern that U.S.-based employees may be disproportionately affected by organizational changes, restructuring efforts, outsourcing initiatives, or staffing decisions. While employees may not have visibility into the business rationale behind such decisions, these concerns have contributed to a growing sense of uncertainty and fear regarding long-term employment stability.
The resulting environment has negatively affected morale, engagement, trust in leadership, and employee retention. Several employees have indicated that they are actively seeking employment elsewhere due to concerns regarding the current direction of the organization and the workplace culture they are experiencing.
Potential Conflict-of-Interest Review
Employees have questioned whether all relevant conflict-of-interest reviews, disclosures, approvals, and governance procedures have been completed regarding:
• Leadership relationships
• Outside business activities
• Consulting engagements
• Vendor relationships
• Hiring decisions
• Contracting arrangements
• Procurement processes
I do not possess sufficient information to determine whether any policy violations have occurred. However, given the frequency with which these concerns are raised, I believe an independent review would be appropriate to ensure transparency and compliance with applicable company policies.
Hiring, Promotion, and Vendor Selection Practices
Employees have also expressed concerns regarding the transparency of certain hiring decisions, leadership appointments, consulting engagements, contractor relationships, and vendor selections.
Specifically, employees have questioned whether certain decisions may involve individuals with prior professional relationships or historical business connections. Employees are seeking assurance that all such decisions have been evaluated using appropriate review processes and approved in accordance with company policies.
Again, I am not asserting that any policies have been violated. Rather, employees are requesting greater transparency regarding the controls, approvals, and oversight mechanisms used when evaluating such relationships and business decisions.
Request for Review
I respectfully request that Ethics and Compliance:
• Review the concerns described above.
• Evaluate whether workplace culture concerns warrant further assessment.
• Determine whether any conflict-of-interest disclosures, approvals, or related governance processes should be reviewed.
• Assess whether hiring, promotion, consulting, procurement, vendor-selection, and contracting processes have been followed appropriately.
• Evaluate whether employees are able to raise concerns without fear of retaliation.
• Ensure that employees who participate in any review or investigation are protected from retaliation and can provide information confidentially.
• Communicate findings and any resulting actions as appropriate under company policy.
I submit this complaint in good faith and in the interest of promoting a workplace culture founded on transparency, accountability, professionalism, respect, and ethical leadership. My hope is that an independent review will provide clarity regarding these concerns and help strengthen employee confidence in the organization's governance and compliance processes.
Thank you for your time, attention, and consideration of these matters.
Sincerely,

Big brother is watching.
Instead of coming here to learn about issues and what people think, ET (KT) is more concerned with reprimanding those who might be posting. As if there are not more important things they could focus time and resources on. Hey, ET, this is part of the problem.

I'm just wondering if there is any kind of remedy in case of retaliation or whatever else reason for an unfair ranking?

Are U.S. employees laid off and then replaced by H-1B or L-1B workers performing substantially the same work? Has that happened ever....

If your employer laid you off while hiring or transferring H-1B or L-1B workers, these are the main laws worth asking an attorney to investigate:

H-1B displacement law — INA §212(n), 8 U.S.C. §1182(n)
For covered employers, replacing a U.S. worker with an H-1B worker doing an essentially equivalent job can violate the law.

H-1B recruitment requirements — 20 CFR §§655.738–655.739
H-1B-employers must make good-faith efforts to recruit U.S. workers and offer positions to qualified U.S. applicants.

L-1B requirements — INA §101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(15)(L)
L-1B status is for employees with specialized knowledge who are transferred from a qualifying foreign company to a related U.S. company.

L-1B fraud or misrepresentation — INA §212(a)(6)(C)
False statements or material misrepresentations in obtaining immigration benefits can create serious immigration consequences.

WARN Act — 29 U.S.C. §2101 et seq.
Large qualifying layoffs may require advance notice. This is separate from H-1B and L-1B rules.

H-1B whistleblower protection — INA §212(n)
You may be protected from being fired, threatened, demoted, or punished for reporting suspected H-1B violations.

Retaliation laws
An employer generally cannot punish you for making a legally protected complaint about unlawful employment practices.

Title VII — 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2
Discrimination based on national origin is prohibited.

INA §274B — 8 U.S.C. §1324b
Certain discrimination based on citizenship status or national origin is prohibited.

Some U.S. citizen employees reporting to IDC manager are required to work midnight/overnight hours while comparable employees reporting elsewhere are not, these are the potential violations to investigate:

National-origin discrimination — Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2
If the different scheduling is because of national origin.

Adverse working conditions for U.S. workers — INA § 212(n), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(n)
Particularly relevant if other employees doing comparable work receive better hours or working conditions.

Overtime violations — FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207
If the overnight schedule results in more than 40 hours per week without required overtime pay.

I have had the most difficult time helping me build an HR case against an SVP who retaliates and regularly attacks me publicly. Copilot has done an amazing job at gathering the facts and putting it together in a nice refined document with proof points. I strongly recommend that anybody else use Copilot to do the same if you were experiencing retaliation of bullying at work.

I have had this experience. Told the obvious truth and was reprimanded for not being a team player. They wanted to keep the lie alive so they could be promoted. Company spends a lot of money, time, and effort keeping lies alive so that the chosen ones can be promoted. We would be much more profitable if they would quit working on these lies.

https://youtube.com/shorts/WlQ3ZOgWfnU?is=0it6Te-s-v9lYnMj

There are plenty of opportunities here if you count favoritism, being used, and watching other people get ahead. Leadership can lie or retaliate and somehow never seems to face any consequences.

To long didn’t read warning for those with minimal or no attention spans.

…. “Do we even have a HR department anymore” this line in on the post on here… really stands out.

It’s a sad question. Coated and baked Irony.

The sadness is…. Anyone with a disability has a sh*t ton of stress dealing with everything while dealing with medical conditions.

Then they have to deal with hr accommodation “specialist advisors” who would absolutely fail on their knowledge of what it means to uphold the rights of a protected class and provide adequate assistance… not to mention the clear lack of understanding, support, and decency being demonstrated by these advisors falling stunningly short of someone who should be a expert, professional, and well versed in disability accommodations.

It’s unbelievable U.S. Bank has gotten to a point where the department that oversees disability request is filled with such jarring incompetence in all levels of the management. From top to bottom to a point where this question is exploding.

The irony is….

Someone who holds the title “HR Accommdation Specialist”

Conducts themselves as who doesn’t know left from right when it comes to the protected rights of disability accommodations and will belligerently participate in the interactive process in bad faith with zero worries of legal blow back.

Like seriously….

It is sooo ironic to see that title attached to anyone who performs so poorly when it comes to performing that role so poorly when matching it to being a “specialist” in disability accommodations.

Seriously, the structure and current people put in place is beyond broken.

Incompetence was never addressed for so long……. the question…… “do we even have a hr department” is exploding.

No more operating under the pretext of mistakes happens and the possibility of things falling through cracks because such is life.

Nope. The incompetence is at a point of no return since it’s been allowed to continue and fester for so long……. Rarely acknowledged or addressed… with what seem like no will to correct and do right.

You as a faithful U.S. bank Employee should naturally be able to trust the process and believe your employer would take care of you.

U.S. Bank should and needs to make sure we have competent advisors that truly meet and uphold the title attached next to their names… especially in a department where liability should be taken seriously….

Especially at a time you need it most… and even more so….. when you are asking for help for yourself…. Which also includes help for “you” that ultimately benefits U.S. Bank from your spent time…. Your given and continued given efforts and work ….for the gain of the company as a whole, those above you, and the share holders.

You are not just a number. Used up and tossed to the side because you got disabled or have a disability.

Years of time you have given is something to not take lightly.

Sure you got your “pay”

But I am sure a lot of us are realizing how uneven this trade off is in this economy.. and how uneven the scale gets when weighed with incompetence and disability discrimination.

We are all human being giving our most priceless possessions away to this company in the form of our energy and time… regardless of disabilities or not.

But you know what…. A bigger middle finger for those who discriminate and wrong anyone with disabilities.

Disgusting behavior. And it should be called out. If you are silent… then… well… it’s a dirty weight to carry.

A disability should be taken serious when it comes to your legal rights by law.

HR and management have to participate in the interactive process in good faith.

This means they cannot delay (unreasonably such as the silence like we are reading here or unnecessarily dragging out the process either by lack of response or insubstantial actions/responses during the interactive process.

Make sure to keep a clean and documented record of the interactive process to support your accommodation request as being reasonable and is able to prove if bad faith is being conducted by hr or management during the interactive process.

If you are in this sad and unfortunate situation, then register and create an account online with eeoc. It is very easy and straightforward process to start and defend your protected rights.

At this point, it seems like this is the only way to preserve your rights and the only language that is understood to get your rightfully deserved accommodations for disabilities.

The bare minimum and absolute MUST…… employers have to do………. is participate in the interactive process in GOOD FAITH and 100% without a doubt approve an accommodation request if it can be proven as being…….. REASONABLE.

NO one is doing any favors for you outside of that.

It’s the LAW.

The employee is doing their job as required by us bank and the LAW to fulfill their title of being a hr advisor disability specialist.

Hr and managers cannot deny your disability accommodations based on their own preferences, attitude, prejudice, or what kind of mood they are that day.

And you better believe they will CONFIDENTLY provide bogus denial reasons and switch things up when it comes to your job duties as a form of discrimination or retaliation to deny you… trying to slyly get around the law sc--wing you with a smile…

Read. There is a lot of nuance when it comes to approving and denying accommodations.

Make sure you know…. Your disability accommodation has to be approved under the law. As long as it is lawfully Reasonable and does create a burden for the company as defined by law.

And chances are… such a big company like us bank will have a incredible hard time proving your accommodation is a burden or is unreasonable.

The bare minimum and absolute must is fixed. It’s not up for debate or misconceptions that will ultimately result to misconduct because the LAW needs to be followed.

No confusion. Nothing to do or talk about other than what is required under the law and interactive process.

Period. Unbelievable the amount of incompetence in a department where this should be an unchangeable screen saver for each manager and hr employee.

Use it. Just like how any employer would do it against you without hesitation.

Has anyone VP or above refused to give the ridiculous 30 days notice and leave in 2 or “effective immediately.” I’m strongly considering giving 2 middle fingers to these id--ts and just turning my equipment in. Curious as to what the firm can actually do to retaliate other than maybe put on the do not rehire list.

Just saw Community Day in the news. Sure don’t miss that multi-hour, small-talk, forced-smile misery. Events like Community Day used to be the norm when Humana was truly part of the community and not wallowing in a culture of fear and retaliation. Glad I no longer have to deal with being volun-told to brand up for the public rah-rah. And I know I’m not alone.

Being able approved to work remotely makes you a target for the mo--n leadership here. I’ve seen many cases of former colleagues over the years who got laid off after being medically accommodated. Now I’m paranoid because my workload got increased substantially and unusually and if I don’t get them completed, they claim it as my performance issue

Was under AB’s org (EACX) and I got evaluated as one of top performers for years. I took on extra responsibilities when other folks left and this is how I got treated this year.

News report:
https://www.carolinajournal.com/4th-circuit-cuts-fired-wells-fargo-execs-award-from-22m-to-18m/

Actual decision:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/pdf/2026/08/21/christopher_billesdon_v._wells_fargo_securities_llc.pdf

Laying a disabled person off after they ask for an accommodation is unlawful.

Wells Fargo seems to hate disabled people who ask for an accommodation.

https://wbt.com/1649453/4th-circuit-cuts-fired-wells-fargo-execs-award-from-22m-to-18m/

In January 2026, after I raised concerns about two years of workplace abuse and discrimination, three leaders retaliated against me by falsifying the record and signing a written warning built on a fabricated narrative.

For two years, I repeatedly asked for one thing: to no longer report to the person whose conduct I had reported. They said no every time.

Then, after I raised the issue again, I was disciplined. My bonus was taken away. My career mobility was frozen. And a written warning was placed in my personnel file to justify whatever comes next.

I kept the underlying record. It speaks for itself. A leadership title does not make evidence disappear.

Laid off yesterday after 15 years in retaliation for not wanting to take on even more work after basically taking on the work of three other people with no consideration for my capacity at all. It was definitely retaliation though I can't prove it. It su-ks that senior executives promote the global culture especially providing psychological safety but it doesn't actually exist and in fact toxic environments thrive. Don't know what my next steps are but there's freedom in not being stressed out about being behind in everything because you're overwhelmed with an ever-growing list of responsibilities and a leadership that doesn't care. Hopefully another division will scoop me. Nowhere to go but up from here

Who else filed? Discrimination, Retaliation and a hostile work environment. This place wreaks of it! Are they piling up while HR does nothing? When the EEOC sees Nike as the employer it’s a front row seat to a charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdraSfJCn8Y

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A former Wells Fargo executive is suing the company, alleging discrimination.

Robert Propst, who served as a senior vice president at Wells Fargo, filed the federal lawsuit in Charlotte. Propst alleges company leaders marginalized him due to his vision impairment and because the majority of the employees who worked under him were Black.
The lawsuit claims the treatment of Propst and his team "changed dramatically" after a 2022 reorganization. Propst says his supervisor refused to meet with his team despite visiting Charlotte regularly and often questioned the value of their work. Propst contends his efforts to address the concerns were met with retaliation rather than support.

Propst claims his supervisor repeatedly pressured him to abandon his approved remote-work accommodation and return to the office. He says the supervisor scrutinized his attendance through badge-tracking reports even though he was exempt due to his remote status.

Propst, who worked for Wells Fargo and its predecessor companies for over 30 years, says his supervisor repeatedly made comments about his age, claiming the remarks were part of a broader effort to force him into an early retirement.
The lawsuit seeks more than $1 million in damages.

I gave Nike 25 years. In the end, I had to leave a job I loved because the systems built to protect employees chose to protect the company instead.

The culture has become toxic, and Nike wants employees to just accept it as the norm.I wasn’t willing to. And I don’t think you should be either.

Speaking up was the hardest thing I’ve ever done. I knew there was a real chance I’d be retaliated against and discriminated against in the very environment I was reporting on. I did it anyway. I filed three formal complaints. Each one can be more than substantiated. Each one was overlooked and ignored — because my boss believes she’s untouchable, protected by the VP she reports to.

Here’s what I’ve learned: addressing problems at Nike isn’t actually possible from the inside. HR, ER, People Solutions, Legal — they exist to protect Nike. Not the employees who trust them enough to come forward. All of these teams report into EH. And when they ignore and disregard Speak Up complaints, they aren’t addressing the real problem — they’re protecting it. The real issue was never me. It was leadership.
People shouldn’t have to leave the job they built a career on.

I had no choice but to leave. And now I’m working with the EEOC to fight for my rights. The rights that Nike didn’t protect. Nike is paying outside lawyers to do damage control — a cost to their bottom line, and a cost to what they claim to stand for. That’s the price of ignoring the truth instead of addressing it.

What ever happened to “do the right thing”? Instead, it’s “know the right people.”
I documented everything. I stood up for myself. And the truth doesn’t lie — even if it takes a judge, jury and a courtroom to prove it. I won’t back down. That’s what Nike wants all of you to do. Don’t be weak!

To anyone inside this culture reading this: not speaking up is also part of the problem. I know it’s scary. I know the odds can feel stacked against you. Do it scared. Report it anonymously if you have to. Go to the EEOC when the internal channels fail you — because they will.

One complaint is easy to bury (mine is not buried) But if enough of you are willing to be vulnerable and speak up, the EEOC will see the trend. Patterns are harder to dismiss than individuals. That’s how systemic problems get proven — not by one voice, but by many pointing at the same thing.

And stop expecting Nike to do the right thing on its own. They’ve already shown you they won’t. That’s not an expectation you should be holding onto anymore. This isn’t about fairness — life isn’t fair, and I’ve stopped waiting for it to be. It’s about something more basic: the right to work in an environment free of hostility, where you aren’t being discriminated against or retaliated against for telling the truth. That’s not too much to ask for. It’s the bare minimum. How low can Nike go?

EH knows this is systemic. TH knows. LT knows. RL knows.

I’m one person. But this toxic culture has become the norm, and it is not okay. I’ll keep fighting until justice is served — because I did the right thing and I don’t have to stay silent about it anymore.

Just do it. Speak up. I see you!

After 25 years I chose to leave. I informally reported a hostile environment twice and then formally reported retaliation, discrimination and a toxic work environment using the proper channels that HR offers.

As a result I was impacted to the extent of needing to take a LOA. My manager remained protected through all of it! The investigators told each person that he interviewed that I filed the complaint and told them who I filed the complaint against. Speaking up came with a price to pay. How did that make the witnesses feel? Would you ever report anything again when you see what someone got away with just because if who they report to. My boss was oddly close to her boss - if I didn’t know better I would say they had a thing. It became a joke.

While I was on sabbatical I came back to retaliation that was so obvious a 10 year old could see it. An intentional overload of work, peers being promoted for no reason, direct reports promoted leaving me with less support and increased workload, rules that applied to me didn’t apply to others, a PAP that included backdated examples as far as months prior some fabricated examples and a final warning that couldn’t be validated. My manager continued to discriminate, retaliate and created a hostile work environment. Suddenly I had negative reviews just months after I informally met with HR. Was this all a coincidence? No! I was a high performer and I know what everyone in the org would say. The downfall is that my boss is so tight with her boss and our HRBP at the time that I didn’t stand a chance. Abusing your position and power seems like the norm. I requested my personnel file and they ironically left items out.

I won’t stay silent and I will tell my story because after dedicating 25 years of my life to that place I want YOU to know that Nike doesn’t care about you. It’s a job! If you left tomorrow they would simply replace you. HR and Legal aren’t there to protect you and speaking up only made things worse for me. For those of you that are being discriminated against, retaliated against or working in a toxic environment as a result of speaking up, document everything and protect yourself. Actively look for work and don’t give up. Use the FMLA resources if you are being impacted in a way that affects your health. It’s not ok but unfortunately you are simply identified by the number on your badge. When VPs support this type of leadership, teams crumble and lose credibility. Be part of the solution and get out. I didn’t leave my job, I left a toxic egotistical leader who got away with what she did up to this point because the VP that she reports to made her behavior acceptable.

You deserve to work in a healthy environment. No matter where you go there will be give and take. When you can see the lack of integrity and morals amongst leaders and VPs that you “should” be looking up to and your health is impacted - it’s time to get real and leave. There is life outside of the berm. Don’t let the fear allow you to settle.

Know your rights and know your resources (EEOC, EAP, LOA etc.) but more importantly know that you deserve to be treated with dignity and respect surrounded by people with integrity and morals.

If you are happy at Nike that’s great. If you have a similar story I would love to hear it.

Nike employees below management already know how the system works. The people closest to the work carry the deadlines, solve the problems, document the processes, train the teams, and rescue failing projects. Management controls the narrative. When the work succeeds, leadership takes the visibility. When it fails, an individual contributor takes the blame.

Employees are told to be bold, challenge convention, speak candidly, and bring their full selves to work. But the real rules are very different. Do not challenge the wrong manager. Do not expose incompetence. Do not question favoritism. Do not document too much. Do not become inconvenient. And do not expect HR to protect you from leadership.

At LBJ Innovation, politics can matter more than performance. Personal relationships can matter more than expertise. Loyalty to management can matter more than loyalty to the work. Employees quickly learn that speaking up is only encouraged when what they say is safe, flattering, and easy to ignore. Raise a serious concern and suddenly the conversation becomes about your tone. Document a pattern and you become difficult. Ask for accountability and you become the problem.

The same company that publicly celebrates inclusion can become remarkably efficient at protecting itself when employees raise concerns about discrimination, retaliation, disability, or unequal treatment. That is how fear becomes culture. It does not require everyone to agree. It only requires enough people to understand the consequences of speaking honestly.

Employees watch underperforming managers survive while strong contributors disappear. They watch favoritism get reframed as trust, political loyalty get rewarded as leadership, and self-preservation get dressed up as business judgment. They watch the people doing the actual work treated as replaceable while those managing appearances protect their titles, reputations, and stock awards.

Most employees see it. Few feel safe enough to say it. That silence is not proof that the culture is healthy. It is proof that the consequences are understood.

Nike does not have a shortage of talent. It has a leadership accountability problem. Innovation cannot thrive where employees are afraid to speak. Inclusion cannot exist where vulnerable employees are treated as liabilities. Accountability cannot exist where managers control the story and workers absorb the consequences.

Culture is not what appears in a town hall, an employee survey, or a presentation about values. Culture is what happens when someone tells the truth and leadership decides what to do with them.

The people doing the work already know what the culture is.

They live it every day.

Anyone else experience this?

https://www.hcamag.com/us/specialization/employment-law/employee-sues-us-bank-for-firing-her-months-after-hr-complaint/567107

For the love of yourself, if your rights were violated currently or previously report it! Do it anonymously, but do it! Stand up for yourself because discrimination, retaliation and a toxic work environment isn’t ok. File a report with the EEOC immediately! Based on the number of posts that I see, Nike will be exposed for normalizing this. HR and Legal will not protect you so please DO NOT rely on their canned response “we take these matters seriously.” Consult with a lawyer if you need to but the EEOC wants to hear from you! Be the one that breaks the cycle instead of allowing the environment to break YOU.

An email was sent out last night that went to a lot of B2B

Managers are to target reps who “lean” on them to much. This is a grossly obvious tactic to weed out people who ask for help a lot.

We also find it odd that the manager that sent it out is never around. Some employees don’t even know who he is but yet he is their AD

Must be nice to have a job where you don’t have to talk to your reps but want them targeted for asking for help

What can those of us do that are feeling like we are being retaliated against for taking the VSP route. I do care about my job and I want to leave on good terms.

Appreciate the effort to send out surveys to show how difficult this place is to get anything done, but history has shown that people here who complain about the insanity are considered “bad attitude “ and given the axe in the next round of layoffs.

Beware the new CHRO Samantha H
My hubby works for Verizon n says she smiles big n projects positivity n then will turn around and RIF hundreds of y’all
If you have a chance, bask her how many people she layed off at Verizon
She and her people are notorious for retaliating against employees too so be careful