before the court before its original decision and order the postal service was on notice that that was a possible remedy and it apparently if i understood your earlier answer correctly did not put on any evidence or even argument as to why that would be inappropriate and i have very similar concerns about it's also not clear to me whether when after the evidence closes and the judge says i want filings and you make the filings and you ask for reinstatement moderately out there that for your time any discrimination and this is exactly what church services did she was troubled by the motivation behind all of these and she was going to answer the question what's the motivation behind me sanderson's terminations there is nothing  trial court sitting in a bench trial seeing the witnesses for seven days come into her own conclusion that there are sufficient similarities that she can make a meaningful comparison that we would argue is a sound exercise collective bargaining agreement does not necessarily mean what the words on the page say or even what the postal officials said in an affidavit and they they never have the opportunity to present  evidence seems to me either so i'm forced to to to the argument well why isn't there some merit to their claim that they were created really in exactly that way is there was an opportunity for them to explain a different interpretation of the c d s in the briefing what was not allowed in this case was consideration of extra record evidence about within its discretion to deny reopening a record because at this late juncture it is extremely strange and very prejudicial to the postal service to essentially have an entirely new trial on something that was brought up after the trial had already c your honor the the district judge here emphasized throughout the order on reconsideration the difference between how miss anderson was treated compared to other similarly allegedly similarly situated specifically the court held in the order reconsideration that sleeping on the job was not taken seriously by the boston police force but that is simply not what happened here and she said they've never terminated any body  or any discipline and fraction this is the very first time it's quite an extreme remedy and him and reaching the question of why did the grandma was retaliatory i'm take a look at the background here i'm going to take a look at how they dealt with their situations where not only was this line ordered it certainly wasn't this is this is a case of someone who is repeatedly displaying insubordination on the job acquire error and her determination that her nation here you obviously disagree with her honor the standard for determining whether someone in the court is an appropriate comparable is whether you have to question whether there are any difference material difference is that would explain the employer's conduct and here there are multiple some of which were not discussed by chance agreement after multiple times of having fallen asleep but again we are here presented with an employee who despite fully knowing that there was an emergency situation who was assigned to guard a two thousand square foot hole in the side didn't have that opportunity the judge then decided to change course and ask everybody to submit evidence