Dakota Meyer is suing BAE

Dakota Meyer, the USMC veteran Scout Sniper who was awarded the Medal of Honor earlier this year, is suing his former employer BAE Systems OASYS.

According to the lawsuit Meyer quit his job after he learnt about the sale of high-end thermal scopes being sold to Pakistan. Meyer claims that BAE prevented him from getting a job with a former employer by say he was a poor worker with an alcohol problem. The AP Reports

According to the lawsuit filed Monday, BAE hired Meyer in March but the relationship quickly soured. Meyer said he became dismayed in April upon learning that BAE had pursued sales of weapons systems to Pakistan, and sent an email to his supervisor expressing his disapproval.

Meyer wrote that it was “disturbing” how U.S. troops were being issued outdated equipment when better, advanced thermal optic scopes were being offered to Pakistan.

“We are simply taking the best gear, the best technology on the market to date and giving to guys that are known to stab us in the back,” Meyer wrote in the email, according to the lawsuit.

Roehrkasse, the BAE spokesman, said it is the State Department and not BAE that makes the decision on which defense-related products can be exported.

Meyer claims his supervisor began berating and belittling him after sending the email, at one point allegedly taunting him about his Medal of Honor by calling it Meyer’s “pending star status.” That supervisor, Bobby McCreight, is also named in the lawsuit and is still employed by BAE. Roehrkasse said McCreight is a former decorated Marine sniper.

Meyer resigned from BAE in May. He then tried obtaining a job at a former employer, San Diego-based Ausgar Technologies, but the lawsuit claims the opportunity fell through after McCreight characterized Meyer as a poor employee during a conversation with a manager who had to approve new hires.

[ Many thanks to George for emailing us the link. ]

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • lt. malashenko

    im sorry i do not know much of englishki but why is it that this big corporation is trying to slander this hero of war? why is there not mass outrage over this? greetings from the MVD.

    • Arifonzie

      100% good question……
      Sgt.. Meyer is right to exercise his concience and be alarmed at sales to Pakistan . BAE should be ashamed and I think they will soon from all the bad press this will generate

      • deimos

        What makes you think they would be ashamed by this? This is peanuts compared to what BAE has pulled before. Ashamed? Give me a break.

    • W

      the same reason why there is no outrage over the many other instances of the military-industrial complex selling to questionable people or organizations: the people responsible for dispensing justice for these violations are bought by the very people they are supposed to regulate. Corporatism is a catch 22 that way.

      • W

        don’t take offense to this malashenko because i mean to be humorous, but i find it amusing that somebody from the MVD side (from the supposedly “evil, scary” Russians) would be asking the questions you are asking. that means our political system needs a serious replacement.

      • lt. malashenko

        i do not take offense to that statement, we both hail from different countries with different systems and ideologies. i do think that the past causes much fear.
        i think that perhaps that county of yours need a resurgence of patriotism, not all Russians have honor and companies have been thieves before but high profile cases like this are often reviewed and the slanderers to the heroes of the Russian federation are often reprimanded. we have our two organizations have worked together, and i do have much hope that our two countries can become more of a strong alliance.

        it is good to see at least a reaction to this news, live strong patriots!

    • Mike

      Only because the newspapers didn’t write about it yet.
      When it hits the papers, I guess there’s gonna be a pretty large shitstorm over this. Especially with “Pakistan getting better toys than Uncle Sam & Associates”.

      • deimos

        Don’t kid yourself.

  • Komrad

    Well, I don’t completely agree with Meyer on selling stuff to Pakistan or rather how he handled it, giving a poor recommendation for personal/office political reasons is unprofessional and also a pretty dick move.

  • Reverend Clint

    BAE does have a point about it being the DOD’s fault if the troops dont have the up-to-date tech but its still shitty they are selling this stuff to the paki’s

  • Dave H

    We don’t know the whole story, but the BAE spokesman is correct about the State Department setting the rules of what can and cannot be exported. What gets issued to US troops is up to the Department of Defense. Neither is in BAE’s hands. (Although it’s possible they lobbied State really hard for the export licenses because Defense wouldn’t buy their stuff.)

    I can see Meyer’s frustration, but when it’s business you don’t have allies and enemies, only customers and competitors.

  • Spade

    I just became a manager at my company.

    HR told us, more than once verbally and in writing, that we were to NEVER EVER say anything more than dates of employment to a person from another company asking for references. Nothing else, neither positive or negative.

    We were told we could give a positive reference on our own time on our own phone number but not as a company rep. For a negative reference we were told to keep our mouths shut.

    Where I work, McCreight would lose his job. The whole MOH thing just gives it publicity.

    • Sid

      I once worked for a board of directors that included an attorney who worked for the SS Administration in employment law. He gave exactly the same instructions to me. I actually wrote his guidance out and lamentated it to my desk.

      He/she worked for us from____ to_____. I am not allowed to comment further. Thank you.

      Positive reviews were something I was permitted to do on my time. Negative reviews were something I could take to the grave or the job I found after I was fired.

      The Medal of Honor and Pakistan have very little to do with this case. It is one of those bold letter laws. My current state is a “right to work” state and the laws are unbelievably simple to follow (see above). That he was denied a job based on the statement of his former supervisor is the only relevant fact. It does not matter if BAE is selling children’s souls to the devil. What does matter is the action BAE takes against its employee for having issued a negative employment referral.

  • Maigo

    I thought high-end thermal was one of those restricted items that couldn’t be exported. At all.

  • alex

    BAE is cheap… Although the BAE rep is correct in saying that State has to approve the sale, BAE doesn’t need to be selling to our enemies and asking State to approve it. State isn’t twisting BAE’s arm to make the sale.

    BAE whoring America to her enemies…

    • 18D

      Pakistan is not one of our enemies. I would understand if it was Iran or something.

      • Benjamin

        Remember the “Airlift of Evil”?

      • Arifonzie

        “Pakistan is not one of our enemies ”
        Oh really?……

      • 18D

        I understand what you guys are saying, but Pakistan is not an Enemy of the State. If Meyer didn’t agree, he should have went a different route with it.

        I think he definently has a right to sue for slander, even if BAE’s accusations were true. But, Meyer shouldn’t have put BAE business “out there”.

      • Mike

        “Pakistan is not one of our enemies.”

      • karnakM2

        Wow, when did you go to the Q course. Because, having that MOS usually requires a higher than average understanding of who your enemies are.

        If you think Pakistan is not your enemy, read a book called ‘Ghost War’. A fine read, and tells you exactly who should be bombed, and in what order.

        Actually, you don’t need to read that book. Can you tell me where OBL lived and was killed?

      • 18D

        @karnakM2- 2001-2003. The answer to your question.

        I never said Pakistani nationals weren’t fighting with the enemy. I said Pakistan is not an Enemy of the State. In other words, Pakistan as a country and government are not considered by the US government to be our enemy. They are considered to be allies of our government. With that being said, it doesn’t surprise me that a company that sells us weapons accessories is also selling those same components to Pakistan.

        Funny thing is that Oasys, which is not exactly BAE, hasn’t even sold anything to the Pakistani government. They applied for a grant to export thermal sights to and from Pakistan, but they haven’t sold anything to them. Most reports say that Meyer was upset that Oasys presented state of the art technology to Pakistan and not our own troops. First of all, that’s a beef with the DOD, not Oasys. Second of all, US troops have actually been using the newest Oasys sights for quite some time now. Just because Meyer was never offered the use of such sights doesn’t mean they aren’t in the hands of the US warfighter. Of course he didn’t know that at the time, probably because most US troops (like Meyer) aren’t “dialed in” gun people.

    • W

      “but Pakistan is not an Enemy of the State”

      yeah, keep dreaming… naive imperialism is pretty hilarious.

      • W

        “BAE whoring America to her enemies…”

        just like the military industrial complex and its politician cronies whoring away entire generations of youth to fight wars for the bankers and a perpetual cycle of debt. Do you really support our men and women in military? learn the truth why they get sent to war. You at least owe them that much.

        This is not the first time a MoH recipient has called out these creatures for what they really are…(reference General Smedley Darlington Butler, Major General, United States Marine Corps)

  • HK93

    At all the companies I have worked at, the policy was just to confirm/deny if a person worked there. To go out of their way to make this kind of a statement reeks of a vicious and mean spirited vendetta.

    • 18D

      Everyone keeps getting on BAE about the statements they may or may not have made, but what about the company Meyer was trying to work for. They have an obligation not to inquire about subjects like those mentioned to them. They then turned around and didn’t hire a guy because of unsubstantiated claims mad by a former employer. That company should be receiving a portion of everyone’s disgust as well. They violated Meyer’s rights and his trust. That’s BS if you ask me.

      We haven’t heard BAE’s side of the story or Oasys (where the issue really exists) side of it either. They didn’t sell anything to Pakistan yet. They only applied for a grant that would allow them to import/export thermal scopes. Meyer knew that. What he didn’t know is that our troops have been running the newer scopes made by Oasys that he said were not in the hands of our warfighter.

      • There is no “obligation” not to inquire about any thing with respect to previous employers and references.

  • W

    sounds similar to ITT’s bulls–t with the enhanced night vision goggles.

  • James

    While I like this site a great deal and read it everyday, I do not usually post comments on it. But after I read this, I felt the need to add something to the discussion.

    About 15 years ago, I worked for a very large multi-billion dollar defense contractor. My job was to conduct due diligence investigations on the company’s foreign partners and clients. To make a long story short, I conducted such an investigation on the company’s partner in PRC and found that the latter was under USG investigation for diverting sensitive technology intended for civiliain use to the PRC military factories.

    In accord with the company’s own internal regulation, I strongly recommended termination of the relationship with this partner. My boss, who was the head of the department (a retired military officer), concurred and forwarded my report to the senior management.

    At that point, the senior management of the company ordered my boss to tell me to “revise” the report. My boss declined to do so and was subsequently fired (only later did I find out that he “voluntarily resigned” after obtaining an agreement with the company, a provision of which included protecting me from further reprisals from the company).

    When I found out about all this, I wrote a letter of protest to the senior management of the company and resigned. Some time after, an investigator from the ombudsman’s office of the company interviewed me. But nothing happened. The senior management eventually sacked a large number of the work force, increased stock prices and cashed in on their options. Later the company went through a difficult period during which its workers and their families suffered greatly (as did the “company town”).

    This episode left an indelible impression on me about the alacrity with which “American” companies engage in near treasonous and certainly unethical (by the standards of the company’s own ethics policy in this particular case) behaviors in pursuit of sales.

    As a naturalized American who deeply loves this country, it was certainly eye-opening and disheartening.

    I don’t know who is right and wrong in the story of BAE vs. Mr. Meyer, but I would not in the least bit surprised if Mr. Meyer’s story is completely true.

  • Nadnerbus

    Meyer has certainly earned the right to have a full and public hearing on this matter. I would like to see one of the bigger mainstream media outlets get a hold of this and not let it go until a fuller understanding of the he-said-she-said is out there.

    I trust corporate America to do the right thing about as much as I trust government to save me from a natural disaster. We need to keep a wary stink-eye on these types until they have proven themselves otherwise.

    Also, a lawsuit probably won’t get him squat. Companies like BAE have lawyers hanging around with nothing but time to deal with stuff like this, and get it drawn out and buried. The court of public opinion is much more effective.

  • davethegreat

    See that blue star-covered thing hanging from his neck, on that blue outfit with the two rows of dangling shiny things over his heart? It means that calling him a “poor worker” is at best unlikely, if not flat-out slander. Unless you catch that man drunk at work while urinating into the company’s water cooler, nobody is going to believe is a slacker.

    • JM

      No offense to him or any other Marines, but just being a Marine doesn’t exempt someone from being a bastard. Just look at the Marine vets that are protesting with the Occupy Wall St crowd.

      • Roy

        Your right, those “bastard” marines protesting with the occupy wall Street crowd , standing up for the working class, against the bailouts given to the too big to fail banks, corporate greed, and bottom up income redistribution. Don’t they know they risked their lives to help those multinational corporations to be able to profit on their lost blood, limbs, and lives? Where are those ” bastard” marines gratitude for their corporate masters? How dare any one think for a moment that a American war hero and MOH winner could be truthful and have honor. Of course the corporation is right and he is wrong.


      • Komrad

        I agree with you except for the OWS jab. While I have no love for the OWS movement, calling (for the most part) peaceful, if disruptive, protesters bastards is more than a bit harsh. You not agree with their politics or methods, but bastards they are not. I frankly would argue that OWS is like a Democratic Tea Party. Unorganized, uncentralized, undefined demands, lack of real definable purpose beyond general discontent, and more than a few bad picket signs. However, I prefer not to resort to ad hominem attacks.

      • Actually I think that if you are refering to the “Marine” at the Oakland OWS protests, there is some doubt of his bona fides.

    • 18D

      That MOH doesn’t make him any more special than any other combat veteran. It also doesn’t mean that he is some kind of super employee or exempt from being a problem drinker. To think otherwise would be a disservice.

      • Roy

        I think you make good, sane , reasonable observations. As a democrat I can confirm that “Unorganized, uncentralized, undefined” are the first three words in our party charter.

  • 18D

    I don’t like the situation at all. We don’t really know the whole story, but if we take it at face value, Meyer needs to chill. BAE is a business. They have the right to sell their products to “US Allies” if the State Department requires them to. Meyer should have handled it differently and it sounds like BAE could have done the same.

    Sueing BAE? Come on! That’s weak.

    • Nadnerbus

      The lawsuit sounds more from his former boss actively trying to sink his career elsewhere after resigning in protest. I got my law degree from TV court dramas, so i have no idea if that is grounds for litigation, but it is pretty dickish to say the least.

      If nothing else, bringing this all to light might make State reevaluate who and what they sell high tech military gear to. Selling high tech to Pakistan seems iffy after the last couple of years worth of double dealing.

    • Joe

      Law is a tricky thing but employers are EXTREMELY limited in what they can and cannot say when asked about a former employee. This is far from the first defamation suit filed over similar comments.

      Anyone who has gone through manager training for a major company can probably attest to this. Often, all you are allowed to respond to such requests, by company policy, is “yes, (name) worked for me from (date) to (date).”

      The defamation is the only issue here. The sale or non-sale of gear to Pakistan is completely peripheral to the legal case.

  • Lance

    Good ridence too BAE gave him a crappy deal and backed out and called him unfit to work. Far as I care he can sue every penney out of BAE.

  • Lance

    Problem is Pakistan is a failed state and much of its assists on the Afghan boarder is more under Taliban control than Islamabad’s control. Pakistan is a trouble maker right now.

    • W

      lance, you are absolutely correct. apparently five people cannot even spell political science.

  • Josh

    It is not up to BAE to ensure the American troops get the best equipment, if the DOD doesn’t want to by it, there is no law against them selling it to their “allies”, its just capitalism. So I think that although Sgt Meyer’s complaint was not necessarily correct, sure he has rights to disagree with the company and should be free to exercise them. However this does not mean that BAE’s actions regarding his reference are excusable if indeed this is what happened.
    Like them or Loath them BAE is an international company, selling goods to whomever they please, whats to stop BP from selling oil to Pakistan, (oil may be a bad example but you get the idea)

    • HSR47

      Actually, it seems to me that this is precisely what ITAR was intended to prevent…

    • PithHelmut

      So because we have Capitalism our morals, our loyalties they just get blown out the window? In that case one of us has to go, either Capitalism or morality.

  • 18D

    So is The Firearm Blog going to cover stories like this involving other veterans?

    • 18D

      Wow! Twelve thumbs down (and counting)! I didn’t know so many people who read this blog hated hearing about veterans. If you don’t like this story, don’t read it!

    • Komrad

      It sounded to me like you were being sarcastic. Also, incidentally, I don’t have much interest in veteran related stories if the fact that a veteran was involved is the primary interest of the story.

  • West

    Wish I could say I was surprised by this kind of corporate screwery.

    Im no fan of frivolous lawsuits but if BAE slandered him then he should go after them. However the lawsuit turns out I doubt a MOH winner will have a hard time finding employment.

    • 18D

      Your right West! I hope no one is sitting at home feeling sorry for Meyer. Meyer isn’t having a hard time at all. He is getting plenty of job offers and he will be doing much better after getting all this media attention.

      None of us know the whole story, and what we do know is what someone DOES want us to know. In other words, someone has an agenda releasing this story.

  • MarkM

    BAE is owned by a UK based company, ITAR can be worked around as it’s a sale to an “ally.” Secondly, DOD has an obligation for due diligence to monitor the state of the art in scopes, nobody has proven exactly how much “better” this new one is. Given that it might be, we still have to go through our ponderous bureaucratic process to solicit, bid, evaluate, and acquire.

    The Pakis can take the State departments money given to them and spend it on whatever they want. Our auditing team will note it just came right back, and that’s that.

    France, Germany, Britain, and the remains of the Soviet have been selling the Pakis millions of dollars in weapons for decades. Considering the state of their economy, it’s largely financed by our mutual foreign aid. Since we can’t let our own plants collapse into bankruptcy, we allow sales to others to keep our own taxpayers employed.

    Congressmen don’t get reelected shutting down defense plants in their district. Yes, we can and will sell scopes to the Pakis so you can keep your job and make payments on that new Silverado.

    • W

      “Yes, we can and will sell scopes to the Pakis so you can keep your job and make payments on that new Silverado.”

      nice concept for a 21st century, sustainable economic strategy LOL

  • Dan-0

    There is no merit in discussing the legality of selling authorized technologies over seas to what is currently an allied country. Mr Meyer’s choice to remove himself from BAE was his own moral decision and prerogative.

    Post resignation is where the real issue is. If he was harassed at work and felt he was in a “hostile” environment, and/or or the continued efforts of his former manager’s “retaliatory” agenda impedes future work in the industry, only then will he have a legitamate legal stance to work from.

    The matter of Mr Meyer being a Medal of Honor should have little bearing to the precedence of his argument in court. Unfortunately, valorous acts in battle do not directly translate to nor guarantee his credibility at work.

    I do whish him the best of luck though, and of course grateful for his highly recognized service to our country.

    • christian

      After reading the article I would agree with you, and I as well wish him the best of luck.

    • micah

      Very much agree with you.

  • Mark

    Is the new tagline for this site firearms and politics?

    • It is about a lawsuit relating to the sale of high-end sniper scopes. Pretty relevant to TFB. I made no moral or political judgements.

  • Mat

    In some fantasy world the guy might be right ,but BAE hired him as a hero poster boy for good PR nothing more ,anyone who thinks he might be of any value on with no education or expertise relevant to BAE lives a fantasy and its none of his bussines what BAE sells to anyone that is uncle Sams job ,they authorise each and every foreign deal ,night vision scopes might be the least of the problem compared to advanced jets and radars,

    • 18D

      Amen Mat!

    • Joe

      Yeah, what experience would a sniper have that would be of value to a company that markets scopes and sights? Good call, bro.

      He was hired before he was awarded the MoH, so the PR value would have been theoretical at best.

    • W

      actually matt, BAE is a multinational, public limited company…(or LLC in the US). On account of what BAE actually produces and sells (nuclear weapons components), you’re goddamned right it is the American people’s business what they sell abroad…

    • Wow. This is exactly the type of “just do your job, shut up and obey your master” comment that gives liberals the ammunition to paint people as jingoistic corporate c***sucking neanderthals.

      It’s farcical to claim U.S. citizens don’t have an interest in the weapons being sold to foreign governments, even foreign governments that such “anti-american” networks as fox news have commentary question Pakistan’s loyalties.

      Second, moreover, it’s farcical that U.S. citizens don’t have an interest to voice concern over whether our troops are being adequately equipped or otherwise, getting the best equipment versus others. In fact, I’d call it pretty disloyal and hypocritical (presuming you say you support our troops) that someone wouldn’t care about such issues.

  • 543

    What U.S. Soldiers will tell you, who have been posted to the Aghan/Pakistan border is that most of the Taliban killed are Pakistanis. The Pakistan Army at the local level turns a blind eye to the Taliban and it’s an open secret by now that some of them are Pakistan Army by day and Taliban by night. BAE can do as it pleases being a private company however if this gets picked up by mass media they could face a potential public relations nightmare being that they are a foreign owned defense contractor firing a genuine American hero. Even if this reaches trail BAE will loose as no American jury will rule against a Medal of Honor recipient no matter where you live, that’s just fact. BAE should settle out of court and be done with it.

    • 18D

      “No American jury will rule against a MOH recipient”

      I hope that’s not true!

    • ThomasD

      BAE, being the defendant, gets to choose trial by judge or trial by jury. Their lawyers are not stupid, they will choose to argue before a single judge.

      What BAE was ultimately doing may be, in their own words, entirely legal but that does not make it moral or just.

  • micah

    So apparently, the people who read the firearm blog, even people who are presumably veterans themselves (18D, are you sure you were one?) don’t like veterans. The fact that automatically, many people are calling out Sgt. Meyer as making a mountain out of a molehill seemingly simply because he was am MOH recipient is very disconcerting. We don’t know any specifics on the case but several of you just automatically wrote him off as basically a whiner. Apparently once you receive a medal for valor, that is the high point of your life and you cannot do anything productive beside that. Shame on you 18D and Mat for passing judgement on Meyer without knowing any facts of the case. You should probably think long and hard about your stance. If it weren’t for veterans you and I and everyone else in this seemingly God forsaken country would be under the thumb of some tyrant or other. Im not saying that because he is a veteran that he is above reproach, I have arrested many veterans at my “real” job, but at least have the fucking common courtesy to give him a chance without writing him off as a “poster boy”. Just remember, men died so you could sit in your comfy chair at home and complain about shit like this.

    From reading about Sgt. Meyer’s actions in Afghanistan, he sounds like a man with principles who is unafraid to express himself when he feels those principles are being undermined. Which, is apparently something that is looked upon with hostility from several readers of this blog. I’m almost ashamed to say that I read the same materials on a regular basis as people with moral compasses so askew.

    • 18D

      Don’t you forget that some of those men that died, did so fighting beside myself. Don’t EVER lecture me on the cost of freedom. I stood on the wall and paid for it in blood, sweat, and tears! My daughter went without her father for months and I had to endure life in the most unforgiving environment on earth!

      I never wrote Mr. Meyer off! But, I don’t believe that a MOH somehow makes him more important than any other veteran. You don’t know all the facts either and if this blogs story is all the more you know, then you don’t have as much of the story as I do. Maybe you should think about your comment before you post.

      • micah

        Mat wrote on December 01st, 2011 at 6:43 am
        “In some fantasy world the guy might be right ,but BAE hired him as a hero poster boy for good PR nothing more ,anyone who thinks he might be of any value on with no education or expertise relevant to BAE lives a fantasy and its none of his bussines what BAE sells to anyone that is uncle Sams job ,they authorise each and every foreign deal ,night vision scopes might be the least of the problem compared to advanced jets and radars,”

        To which you replied:
        18D responded to Mat on December 01st, 2011 at 10:50 am
        “Amen Mat!”

        Sounds like you pretty much agree with Mat that Meyer is nothing but a “hero poster boy”. That is the kind of BS that I took issue with. I agree that a medal does not make one special, but it also doesn’t sum someone up. Meyer may have a legitimate bitch with BAE regarding libel, he may not, but it seems like you and others are jealous that he was awarded a medal and you weren’t and therefore want to write him off as a “poster boy”. Maybe he is a complete turd, maybe he’s the perfect human being, but he served and that counts for something in my book. I think he should at least be given the benefit of the doubt. Hes not some turd who does nothing but sit on his couch and play video games while he collects a check from the government every week.

        I do not feel that characterizing some one who served honorably as a mere “poster boy” who basically will never amount to anything more is appropriate and I think it smacks of jealousy and ignorance.

        I didn’t get any medals for valor during my service, but then again I don’t feel that I did anything to deserve them, I was simply doing my job. I personally think medals are stupid and this whole argument about Meyer is why. If it were anyone else, this wouldn’t even be an issue. I just wish people could look past the hype and give him credit for his honorable service and not call him names. Good day sir.

      • I agree with Micah – thumbs up on Matt’s comment that Meyer’s a just poster obey who’s suppose to just shut up and do his job regardless of concerns whether fellow soldier’s are getting the best equipment to use versus others . . . sure sounds like you are writing the guy and his claim off as well as supporting that people have no right or legitimacy to be concerned about who weapons are being sold to and whether are troops are getting the best weapons.

        Yeah, I say that makes you look pretty disrespectful and bad 18D and your part of that old and hopefully by now disreputable “how dare you complain about your corporate masters” school of reverence.

  • BTW, most of the comments miss that in the end, the issue is pretty simple, did agents of BAE intentional misrepresent facts about Meyer that cause him to be wrongfully harmed.

    Whatever you think of BAE or Meyer or who’s right about scopes being sold to Pakistan, that’s not an excuse to intentionally misrepresent facts about Meyer [presuming that occurred].

    I can’t imagine a single person here who would think it would be fair for their employer to claim they have an alcohol problem or a poor employee not because there are facts to reasonably make such statements but because the employer did not like their voicing a position on an issue.

    Maybe him speaking out is the basis for the poor employee claim, though if he was otherwise an excellent employee than that don’t seem reasonable to override the excellent performance – more appropriate would be to say, this is what he did well and this is what we took exception too – his sending an email etc. etc.

  • Joseph

    Crazy stuff. All in all I hope for the best.

    God bless America.

  • where is the goverment in this.

  • James
  • As the admin of this web page is working, no
    hesitation very quickly it will be famous, due to its quality contents.