well here in the last case to be argued green versus town these things  good morning honors may please the court my name is scaring king i'm from paul weiss and i was appointed by this court to represent the appellant plaintiff miss diana green and in particular to address the district court's decision with respect to constructive discharge i know my opponent has elected not to present all argument and for my part i'll try to keep it short i think the issues are actually fairly straightforward this is a decision on a motion for summary judgment the facts inferences and ambiguities must be construed in miscreants favor and the standard for constructive discharge is well established the question is whether the working conditions were so difficult and unpleasant that a reasonable person in her shoes would have felt compelled to resign and what a reasonable person would feel in her shoes is fundamentally a question for the fact finder and this is not a case where there is a complete absence of facts supporting the allegations that mr green was subject to intimidation to unfair treatment to targeting and that she had a very difficult and unpleasant working condition situation is the entire biscuits investigation which led her to resign on the eve of her lateral hearing you know i think that the facts and skase show that she was targeted that the reaction of the chief of police and the police departments the internal affairs officer that investigated was disproportionate to the activities that that had happened and that i think contributed to her feeling of being targeted and unfairly treated by her supervisors and what the district court ended up doing it was following a line of cases that have been percolating at the district level saying that if you have a pre term anation administrative process that an employee cannot claim constructive discharge unless they follow through with that process unless they can show that it was pretty determined are pre judged and i would just start by noting that this is something that the district court certain district courts have have started following i don't think it's grounded in a decision from from this court and i think that this court does not need to  embrace this standard which is a bit rigid and i think too restrictive for the employees but this court doesn't need to reach that question most constructive discharge cases that work condition boys i can't take anymore i'm going to  leave here i don't know that is there anything in the record suggests that that that she was having a very difficult time even before this or is it that she decided i don't want to face the terminations hearing i think i'm going opportunities or more she argue primarily i knew i was going to get fired and therefore i quit she did argue and she i mean she alleged in her complain and she did argue below that there was a sort of pattern of this type of behavior she would be terminated but i just don't want it to be lost that there was a backdrop to this that was not just out of the blue which she she had like the fact that she wanted different hours but that the hours that she got were only differed by one hour  yes she wanted to start earlier rises of kind of a regis it's just it's just one piece of a larger pattern and i had a commission for two hours to get two hours off right after a holiday i think she she had asked for what was customary granted granted to the senior she deemed yourself a senior clerk as opposed to the junior clerk but there was no formal office policy with regard to that was or that is true she was relying on the  perception that she had as opposed to some kind of formal relationship that had been altered as a result of that when she when she was fired it is true that there was no official policy that was being violated and that the defendant are clearly saying that there was no requirement that should be given that extra consideration she's relying on the fast fact that in past practice this was typically given to to the more senior person but it's not just the hours it was also the training opportunities that were all given to the junior clerk and the choice assignments being told that she was too slow being criticized being written up for things like talking about her colleagues as a you point self is enough for constructive discharge yes under the construct construct of the availability of a pre term a nation administrative process the cases all say that if you have reasonable belief that it was inevitable that you can still bring in a constructive discharge claim and survive the summary judgment and here and here i think that just record just got it wrong because there was a record in that if she was fired ultimately at the end of the process she would lose her pension and other benefits i think there's something in the record where she believed that she would lose her pension and benefits there was also by resigning when she did to preserve  i don't believe that she lost her pension benefits in the sense i don't think that's in the record that that happened there were also criminal charges that were being threatened she did not have a direct threat that she was going brought up on charges enough here in the record for her to believe that this was a setup and i just want to point out that the district court said there was no basis to prejudge the decision makers but in fact there was a conversation between the town in her union where the town told her through the rap that they were not interested in hearing from her and for the town the employer was holding a louder middle supposedly going to hold a louder and we're hearing to say we don't want to hear from you know i think that is enough of a factual basis  the record here has miss greene just feeling that there was a process and not distinguishing and no one had distinguished for her and there was a two step process that the district court said that a reasonable person would not have concluded that it was inevitable because there was this board of police commissioners but i would submit that you know the idea that a reasonable person in her shoes having been told that the town doesn't want to hear from her having been told that the chief of police thinks that she's stealing from from the from the government and that she needs to be he's not but it's but it's a group of factors and the board the board of police commissioners appoints you know the chief of police this is not going to go well for you that's not what this cases he did not reach the board of police commissioners there's nothing in the record to suggest that she even was aware that there was a second step but i would suggest that everything taken together with the town telling her directly that she was going to lose and the fact that the border police commissioners by definition is more likely and logically for a reasonable person to assume would favor the chief of police the internal affairs police officer  records clerk that the power dynamic here is one where she could reasonably and a reasonable person could conclude that the die was cast and so automatically i think the district court had usurped the role of the fact finder by concluding that a re