"Wow, I've been called a lot of things, man. But inappropriate...that's some fucked up shit, yo!"
the airport screener in the movie Due Date.
and that quote in it's hilarious way sums up why i am again discussing my former employer publicly, and why this may not be the last time. and the fact that my blog was entered as evidence against me, by summit achievement, so that i might not claim unemployment monies, does not scare me away from saying anything and everything i feel like saying.
timeline. i had my last day of work on 6/14. i was fired on 6/20. i road-tripped and wrote a series of blogs chronicling that ordeal and related matters (loosely through directly) up 'til 7/7. on 7/8/11, 18 days after being fired and 24 days after my last day of work, mainly because it seemed like the type of thing a gypsy would do, i filed for unemployment.
the state of maine, not to be confused with a very solid david mamet work state and main, was quick to process. surprising. within a few days, i received word that if i were given benefits for the job i did, where i worked 24/7 for 7 1/2 days at a near poverty level wage, which is a-okay considering one gets to make connections to last a lifetime (virtual high five M), that i would receive the laughable weekly compensation of $162. however, as part of the process to determine if i qualified, they required on oath phone interviews with both me and summit achievement.
i did not know this at the time, but summit went first. thankfully. y'all that are reading this right here right now might want to consider yourselves grateful, too, that summit went first. because you would not be reading this word/paragraph/etc otherwise, because there wouldn't be one. that's not to say this blog is immensely important as a stand alone; rather, out of the infinity to the power of infinity of possible scenarios that could have come to pass, a certain amount configured to bring me to write this and you to read it, and if summit achievement did not do their interview first, this time spent together by degrees would be less likely than the chicago cubs winning a world series in my lifetime. i am pleased that we are together.
because i was speaking with a health clinic about the cost and importance of immunization shots for traveling throughout Latin America, i missed the first attempted call. i received a stern voicemail saying if i did not answer the next call, a decision would be made without my participation. these folks weren't playing. i did a lil' self-guided (is there any other way, really and truly?) relaxation up until the next call came in, then i had my interview. it took place on 7/21, between approximately 4:50 pm and 5:05 pm, est.
becky, an employee of maine's dept. of labor, and someone i now consider dear to me, for reasons you'll soon potentially understand, was the interviewer. it began quite formally and remained that way for the first 1/3 or so. questions about my termination were asked and addressed. i state that i wrote an email to a former student and was subsequently fired. i state that i knew summit wanted its employees to filter communication with former students through them. although becky never came out and asked it, i could see what she wanted to know, so i stated that i had never read any rule about contact with former students. i truly do not know if one exists on the books. (if it does, i know the circumstances that led to that rule being implemented, and i shared that story for becky, later). she didn't ask, but since my blog is now officially a matter of public record, and the case still open, let me say this also - i don't think i ever opened or even cared to open, the vast employee rule book.
it didn't take long for becky to read to me an excerpt from my blog titled, "no accounting for emotion," where i state that i knew i might be fired if i wrote an email. yes, of course i admit to writing that. i was strangely comforted that summit achievement entered my blog as evidence against my unemployment claim, because there is honesty and there is truth, and now we could talk on the level of truth, without those non-admissions that still qualify one as being honest. and then the phone call moves into stickier territory that allows this case to not be open and closed - how former student contact actually plays out.
becky never asked, and i don't think it came to my mind until after we'd hung up, but i will state that prior to my termination, i have exchanged emails with at least 3 other former students. and i know i am not the only person to do so. and not just at the guide level. and i did not and will not name any names. and i did say if it came down to it, i could prove that assertion. but, even with this being an official, on the record, on oath discussion, probably with many pre-written questions on becky's desk or computer, the conversation did not proceed that fluidly from one point of order to another - very few people, if any, possess a zero effect type of objectivity. we've got sex on the brain, and becky was no exception.
i wrote a 5 part blog about this situation in large part because people read the now court document, "no accounting for emotion," and heard sex sex sex. silent and whispered and hushed questions that began probably the day my initial email to M was discovered. is there a plan for sex? was there any? and whatever other paranoidish paths these sexual deviants wanted to follow in their minds ;)
despite the 25,000 or so words (i just made that guess) i wrote to diminish the nearly non-existent role of sex and sexual intrigue between M and i, despite me still not having had sex in over a year, despite my firing and my unemployment case having objectively nothing to do with sex, people just want to talk about me and my perceived sex life. we can add becky to that list of folks, as well as an unnamed person or persons speaking on the record for summit achievement.
so, on the record, let's talk about sex, baby. i've had lots of sex. i love sex. i have plans to have more of it. i intend to seek nirvana through the use of sex (as well as through other means). there's been some type of polyamorous facet, at varying points, in every committed sexual relationship i've been in since i was 20. fuck monogamy, pun intended. even more tiring and stale than monogamy and its against-the-nature-of-maybe-every-human-being, is our affinity for a sexual identity scale going from heterosexual to bi to homosexual.
one, that scale is rarely taught as a scale. two, that scale does not allow for a huge percentage of the population - much of the transgendered community. thus, if a kid is born with sex organs and the make up of more than 1 sex, they are "wrong." operate. and live in shame, regardless of what you do. genetic eunuchs are also wrong. not natural. cause none of these fit into a black 'n white classification system we made: men and women and no variation. and you are hetero or gay, with the only variation being bi likely some dudes made it. probably dudes that were repressing some lust for other dudes.
back to sex - i've had sex with women, men, and transgendered folks. so much that i stopped counting a long time ago, for all stated types. "Wow, I've been called a lot of things, man. But inappropriate...that's some fucked up shit, yo!"
the airport screener in the movie Due Date.
and that quote in it's hilarious way sums up why i am again discussing my former employer publicly, and why this may not be the last time. and the fact that my blog was entered as evidence against me, by summit achievement, so that i might not claim unemployment monies, does not scare me away from saying anything and everything i feel like saying.
timeline. i had my last day of work on 6/14. i was fired on 6/20. i road-tripped and wrote a series of blogs chronicling that ordeal and related matters (loosely through directly) up 'til 7/7. on 7/8/11, 18 days after being fired and 24 days after my last day of work, mainly because it seemed like the type of thing a gypsy would do, i filed for unemployment.
the state of maine, not to be confused with a very solid david mamet work state and main, was quick to process. surprising. within a few days, i received word that if i were given benefits for the job i did, where i worked 24/7 for 7 1/2 days at a near poverty level wage, which is a-okay considering one gets to make connections to last a lifetime (virtual high five M), that i would receive the laughable weekly compensation of $162. however, as part of the process to determine if i qualified, they required on oath phone interviews with both me and summit achievement.
i did not know this at the time, but summit went first. thankfully. y'all that are reading this right here right now might want to consider yourselves grateful, too, that summit went first. because you would not be reading this word/paragraph/etc otherwise, because there wouldn't be one. that's not to say this blog is immensely important as a stand alone; rather, out of the infinity to the power of infinity of possible scenarios that could have come to pass, a certain amount configured to bring me to write this and you to read it, and if summit achievement did not do their interview first, this time spent together by degrees would be less likely than the chicago cubs winning a world series in my lifetime. i am pleased that we are together.
because i was speaking with a health clinic about the cost and importance of immunization shots for traveling throughout Latin America, i missed the first attempted call. i received a stern voicemail saying if i did not answer the next call, a decision would be made without my participation. these folks weren't playing. i did a lil' self-guided (is there any other way, really and truly?) relaxation up until the next call came in, then i had my interview. it took place on 7/21, between approximately 4:50 pm and 5:05 pm, est.
becky, an employee of maine's dept. of labor, and someone i now consider dear to me, for reasons you'll soon potentially understand, was the interviewer. it began quite formally and remained that way for the first 1/3 or so. questions about my termination were asked and addressed. i state that i wrote an email to a former student and was subsequently fired. i state that i knew summit wanted its employees to filter communication with former students through them. although becky never came out and asked it, i could see what she wanted to know, so i stated that i had never read any rule about contact with former students. i truly do not know if one exists on the books. (if it does, i know the circumstances that led to that rule being implemented, and i shared that story for becky, later). she didn't ask, but since my blog is now officially a matter of public record, and the case still open, let me say this also - i don't think i ever opened or even cared to open, the vast employee rule book.
it didn't take long for becky to read to me an excerpt from my blog titled, "no accounting for emotion," where i state that i knew i might be fired if i wrote an email. yes, of course i admit to writing that. i was strangely comforted that summit achievement entered my blog as evidence against my unemployment claim, because there is honesty and there is truth, and now we could talk on the level of truth, without those non-admissions that still qualify one as being honest. and then the phone call moves into stickier territory that allows this case to not be open and closed - how former student contact actually plays out.
becky never asked, and i don't think it came to my mind until after we'd hung up, but i will state that prior to my termination, i have exchanged emails with at least 3 other former students. and i know i am not the only person to do so. and not just at the guide level. and i did not and will not name any names. and i did say if it came down to it, i could prove that assertion. but, even with this being an official, on the record, on oath discussion, probably with many pre-written questions on becky's desk or computer, the conversation did not proceed that fluidly from one point of order to another - very few people, if any, possess a zero effect type of objectivity. we've got sex on the brain, and becky was no exception.
i wrote a 5 part blog about this situation in large part because people read the now court document, "no accounting for emotion," and heard sex sex sex. silent and whispered and hushed questions that began probably the day my initial email to M was discovered. is there a plan for sex? was there any? and whatever other paranoidish paths these sexual deviants wanted to follow in their minds ;)
despite the 25,000 or so words (i just made that guess) i wrote to diminish the nearly non-existent role of sex and sexual intrigue between M and i, despite me still not having had sex in over a year, despite my firing and my unemployment case having objectively nothing to do with sex, people just want to talk about me and my perceived sex life. we can add becky to that list of folks, as well as an unnamed person or persons speaking on the record for summit achievement.
so, on the record, let's talk about sex, baby. i've had lots of sex. i love sex. i have plans to have more of it. i intend to seek nirvana through the use of sex (as well as through other means). there's been some type of polyamorous facet, at varying points, in every committed sexual relationship i've been in since i was 20. fuck monogamy, pun intended. even more tiring and stale than monogamy and its against-the-nature-of-maybe-every-human-being, is our affinity for a sexual identity scale going from heterosexual to bi to homosexual.
one, that scale is rarely taught as a scale. two, that scale does not allow for a huge percentage of the population - much of the transgendered community. thus, if a kid is born with sex organs and the make up of more than 1 sex, they are "wrong." operate. and live in shame, regardless of what you do. genetic eunuchs are also wrong. not natural. cause none of these fit into a black 'n white classification system we made: men and women and no variation. and you are hetero or gay, with the only variation being bi likely some dudes made it. probably dudes that were repressing some lust for other dudes.
back to sex - i've had sex with women, men, and transgendered folks. so much that i stopped counting a long time ago, for all stated types. "Wow, I've been called a lot of things, man. But inappropriate...that's some fucked up shit, yo!"
the airport screener in the movie Due Date.
and that quote in it's hilarious way sums up why i am again discussing my former employer publicly, and why this may not be the last time. and the fact that my blog was entered as evidence against me, by summit achievement, so that i might not claim unemployment monies, does not scare me away from saying anything and everything i feel like saying.
timeline. i had my last day of work on 6/14. i was fired on 6/20. i road-tripped and wrote a series of blogs chronicling that ordeal and related matters (loosely through directly) up 'til 7/7. on 7/8/11, 18 days after being fired and 24 days after my last day of work, mainly because it seemed like the type of thing a gypsy would do, i filed for unemployment.
the state of maine, not to be confused with a very solid david mamet work state and main, was quick to process. surprising. within a few days, i received word that if i were given benefits for the job i did, where i worked 24/7 for 7 1/2 days at a near poverty level wage, which is a-okay considering one gets to make connections to last a lifetime (virtual high five M), that i would receive the laughable weekly compensation of $162. however, as part of the process to determine if i qualified, they required on oath phone interviews with both me and summit achievement.
i did not know this at the time, but summit went first. thankfully. y'all that are reading this right here right now might want to consider yourselves grateful, too, that summit went first. because you would not be reading this word/paragraph/etc otherwise, because there wouldn't be one. that's not to say this blog is immensely important as a stand alone; rather, out of the infinity to the power of infinity of possible scenarios that could have come to pass, a certain amount configured to bring me to write this and you to read it, and if summit achievement did not do their interview first, this time spent together by degrees would be less likely than the chicago cubs winning a world series in my lifetime. i am pleased that we are together.
because i was speaking with a health clinic about the cost and importance of immunization shots for traveling throughout Latin America, i missed the first attempted call. i received a stern voicemail saying if i did not answer the next call, a decision would be made without my participation. these folks weren't playing. i did a lil' self-guided (is there any other way, really and truly?) relaxation up until the next call came in, then i had my interview. it took place on 7/21, between approximately 4:50 pm and 5:05 pm, est.
becky, an employee of maine's dept. of labor, and someone i now consider dear to me, for reasons you'll soon potentially understand, was the interviewer. it began quite formally and remained that way for the first 1/3 or so. questions about my termination were asked and addressed. i state that i wrote an email to a former student and was subsequently fired. i state that i knew summit wanted its employees to filter communication with former students through them. although becky never came out and asked it, i could see what she wanted to know, so i stated that i had never read any rule about contact with former students. i truly do not know if one exists on the books. (if it does, i know the circumstances that led to that rule being implemented, and i shared that story for becky, later). she didn't ask, but since my blog is now officially a matter of public record, and the case still open, let me say this also - i don't think i ever opened or even cared to open, the vast employee rule book.
it didn't take long for becky to read to me an excerpt from my blog titled, "no accounting for emotion," where i state that i knew i might be fired if i wrote an email. yes, of course i admit to writing that. i was strangely comforted that summit achievement entered my blog as evidence against my unemployment claim, because there is honesty and there is truth, and now we could talk on the level of truth, without those non-admissions that still qualify one as being honest. and then the phone call moves into stickier territory that allows this case to not be open and closed - how former student contact actually plays out.
becky never asked, and i don't think it came to my mind until after we'd hung up, but i will state that prior to my termination, i have exchanged emails with at least 3 other former students. and i know i am not the only person to do so. and not just at the guide level. and i did not and will not name any names. and i did say if it came down to it, i could prove that assertion. but, even with this being an official, on the record, on oath discussion, probably with many pre-written questions on becky's desk or computer, the conversation did not proceed that fluidly from one point of order to another - very few people, if any, possess a zero effect type of objectivity. we've got sex on the brain, and becky was no exception.
i wrote a 5 part blog about this situation in large part because people read the now court document, "no accounting for emotion," and heard sex sex sex. silent and whispered and hushed questions that began probably the day my initial email to M was discovered. is there a plan for sex? was there any? and whatever other paranoidish paths these sexual deviants wanted to follow in their minds ;)
despite the 25,000 or so words (i just made that guess) i wrote to diminish the nearly non-existent role of sex and sexual intrigue between M and i, despite me still not having had sex in over a year, despite my firing and my unemployment case having objectively nothing to do with sex, people just want to talk about me and my perceived sex life. we can add becky to that list of folks, as well as an unnamed person or persons, speaking to becky, and speaking on the record, for summit achievement.
is sex really that important? i suppose we all must answer that question for ourselves, and in many different ways: procreation, pleasure, experimentation, discovery, innocence, experience, an apple off of adam's tree-trunk of life, sin?, natural?, good, evil, hedonistic, etc. yeah, i suppose sex has some importance. but like i said, objectively, an unemployment claim has absolutely nothing to do with sex. so, when i spoke about the email that cost me my job, i referred to a "former student" that could have been of any sex. but that wasn't good enough for becky.
"was this student a female?"
"yes."
"and what was the age of this student?"
right about there, i metaphorically reached my hand back and gave becky the spanking that her line of questioning deserved. in a short bit, she apologized. i accepted. she proceeded to state that she did not see anything in any of the evidence that had been given that showed i was inappropriate with the nearly adult age female former student in question. that said, she went on to say that the summit achievement representative did allege...something.
becky and i spoke about how this case will proceed. evidence given, words and statements put on the record, is not open to the contesting parties...now. she'll make a determination within about 10 days. if any party feels there is just reason to appeal the decision, then all the information becomes public, and copies get sent to either party. we then could have a 4-way meeting via the telephone to determine what's what.
here's what. i could give 2 shits about getting this unemployment money. about getting any money. the less i have, the freer i may be. but summit achievement may have gone into the realm of lies, character defamation, and the age-old type of ugliness that the have's have perpetrated on the have not humans that are not being served well by the systems they serve within.
i figure i would have collected unemployment, at the most, for 2 months. that's $1296. summit's unemployment tax rate is probably 1% or so. well, maybe higher, considering they lay off people like clockwork twice a year. maybe 2-3%, which is a percentage of the entire payroll. point being, my case would have barely fractionally dented that rate, and the bottom dollar it reflects. but a business decision was made by them to contest my claim. and then another decision was made, allegedly, by an employee of summit achievement, to defame me at the state and federal level. and there's a good chance the person or persons that allegedly said some shit about me to becky, did or do consider me a friend. but, we're talking about money here. $162 worth of weekly money. or approximately 1/3 of the daily cost for a student to attend summit.
well, i'm not talking about money here. not really. i'm talking about truth and honesty. and this blog is now evidence, so i must be telling the truth. so here the truth about what will happen.
if my claim is denied, i will appeal it. not for money. i may drop my appeal before the telephone 4some money orgy takes place. i want to know what summit said about me. and who said it.
if my claim is accepted, i will appeal it. summit probably will, too. cause they're a biznass, and they're doing it for the money. fred durst does it all for the nookie. i'm doing it for the truth.
this case is beginning to parallel an open relationship i had as a younger man. love had been present there. and lots of sex, since that seems to be what's on everybody's mind. freedom was given. and then silences where there previously were none told the story. and yet, despite intuiting the story, i pressed to hear the story. and i got it. and felt it in my gut. for awhile.
on 7/8/11, i felt a similar gut pain after having lost one particular friend via fb over this ordeal. maybe that friend and more are gone, for now. business decisions have affected, and trumped, friendships for eons. i like that i allow friendships to trump business. nobody, including osama bin laden if he still walks and talks, is excluded from my life.
as for the friendship that led to my termination: it's going splendidly. her birthday is coming up. i sent her off a couple birthday gifts. how you like them (adam's) apples?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrTco6s3cdA&feature=related - as i wrote "no accounting for emotion" on the morning/afternoon of 6/21 i.n the upstairs of The Met, this song came over the loud speakers. i cried then. the experience of the relative position of friendships and their meaning(s) in my life has been interesting. and it keeps this song meaningful generation after generation. i'm relatively certain that i've been able to practice mr lennon words, "in my life, i've loved them all." that's partly why a basically 18 year old girl, and a 30-something gal who cheated on me after we'd lived together for a couple years, are counted among my closest current friends.
however, just because i can give everything away freely, that doesn't mean i will. i may just stay silent, publicly, on the details in this silly unemployment case. over an email. or was it over a friendship? or sex? or money? or business? or capitalism? or a metaphor for something more? or about choice? or to make a signpost showing where all of us were at one particular moment in time? whatever it was about, it's grown. if you wanna know how this shiz continues to grow, ask me. i've got more important things to do than to write for hours and hours about a silly biznass that likely went petty long before they likely went extremely petty in this aforementioned case.
similarly, call me petty, but last night, a few hours after my call with becky, i "buzzed" all the blogs i'd written in regards to this incident. it's not all about causation, is it? i dunno, but i smiled the other day while beach jogging when i thought to myself, "smile, you may already have made the decision you've been sweating."
is sex really that important? i suppose we all must answer that question for ourselves, and in many different ways: procreation, pleasure, experimentation, discovery, innocence, experience, an apple off of adam's tree-trunk of life, sin?, natural?, good, evil, hedonistic, etc. yeah, i suppose sex has some importance. but like i said, objectively, an unemployment claim has absolutely nothing to do with sex. so, when i spoke about the email that cost me my job, i referred to a "former student" that could have been of any sex. but that wasn't good enough for becky.
"was this student a female?"
"yes."
"and what was the age of this student?"
right about there, i metaphorically reached my hand back and gave becky the spanking that her line of questioning deserved. in a short bit, she apologized. i accepted. she proceeded to state that she did not see anything in any of the evidence that had been given that showed i was inappropriate with the nearly adult age female former student in question. that said, she went on to say that the summit achievement representative did allege...something.
becky and i spoke about how this case will proceed. evidence given, words and statements put on the record, is not open to the contesting parties...now. she'll make a determination within about 10 days. if any party feels there is just reason to appeal the decision, then all the information becomes public, and copies get sent to either party. we then could have a 4-way meeting via the telephone to determine what's what.
here's what. i could give 2 shits about getting this unemployment money. about getting any money. the less i have, the freer i may be. but summit achievement may have gone into the realm of lies, character defamation, and the age-old type of ugliness that the have's have perpetrated on the have not humans that are not being served well by the systems they serve within.
i figure i would have collected unemployment, at the most, for 2 months. that's $1296. summit's unemployment tax rate is probably 1% or so. well, maybe higher, considering they lay off people like clockwork twice a year. maybe 2-3%, which is a percentage of the entire payroll. point being, my case would have barely fractionally dented that rate, and the bottom dollar it reflects. but a business decision was made by them to contest my claim. and then another decision was made, allegedly, by an employee of summit achievement, to defame me at the state and federal level. and there's a good chance the person or persons that allegedly said some shit about me to becky, did or do consider me a friend. but, we're talking about money here. $162 worth of weekly money. or approximately 1/3 of the daily cost for a student to attend summit.
well, i'm not talking about money here. not really. i'm talking about truth and honesty. and this blog is now evidence, so i must be telling the truth. so here the truth about what will happen.
if my claim is denied, i will appeal it. not for money. i may drop my appeal before the telephone 4some money orgy takes place. i want to know what summit said about me. and who said it.
if my claim is accepted, i will appeal it. summit probably will, too. cause they're a biznass, and they're doing it for the money. fred durst does it all for the nookie. i'm doing it for the truth.
this case is beginning to parallel an open relationship i had as a younger man. love had been present there. and lots of sex, since that seems to be what's on everybody's mind. freedom was given. and then silences where there previously were none told the story. and yet, despite intuiting the story, i pressed to hear the story. and i got it. and felt it in my gut. for awhile.
on 7/8/11, i felt a similar gut pain after having lost one particular friend via fb over this ordeal. maybe that friend and more are gone, for now. business decisions have affected, and trumped, friendships for eons. i like that i allow friendships to trump business. nobody, including osama bin laden if he still walks and talks, is excluded from my life.
as for the friendship that led to my termination: it's going splendidly. her birthday is coming up. i sent her off a couple birthday gifts. how you like them (adam's) apples?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrTco6s3cdA&feature=related - as i wrote "no accounting for emotion" on the morning/afternoon of 6/21 i.n the upstairs of The Met, this song came over the loud speakers. i cried then. the experience of the relative position of friendships and their meaning(s) in my life has been interesting. and it keeps this song meaningful generation after generation. i'm relatively certain that i've been able to practice mr lennon words, "in my life, i've loved them all." that's partly why a basically 18 year old girl, and a 30-something gal who cheated on me after we'd lived together for a couple years, are counted among my closest current friends.
however, just because i can give everything away freely, that doesn't mean i will. i may just stay silent, publicly, on the details in this silly unemployment case. over an email. or was it over a friendship? or sex? or money? or business? or capitalism? or a metaphor for something more? or about choice? or to make a signpost showing where all of us were at one particular moment in time? whatever it was about, it's grown. if you wanna know how this shiz continues to grow, ask me. i've got more important things to do than to write for hours and hours about a silly biznass that likely went petty long before they likely went extremely petty in this aforementioned case.
similarly, call me petty, but last night, a few hours after my call with becky, i "buzzed" all the blogs i'd written in regards to this incident. it's not all about causation, is it? i dunno, but i smiled the other day while beach jogging when i thought to myself, "smile, you may already have made the decision you've been sweating."
No comments:
Post a Comment