Opinion ID: 4204166
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Investigation of Complaints Against Monroe

Text: On Sunday, January 27, 2013, George called Monroe at home to let him know that some complaints had been made and that he needed to attend a meeting in George’s office the next day. During the conversation, Monroe told George that he had been given a preliminary diagnosis of PTSD.2 On January 28, Monroe met with George, Brooks, and Neuman, although George left soon after the meeting began. Monroe was told that an investigation of complaints made about him would be conducted. He was offered the choice of either taking vacation or moving to a different location during the investigation. Monroe chose to take vacation. During the meeting, Monroe told Brooks and Neuman that he had spo‐ ken to a therapist who believed he had PTSD. Also on January 28, seven of the original employees who met with George, Brooks, and Neuman on January 25 each gave written statements about Monroe. Several said that at the January 24 safety briefing Monroe had cursed at the crew, called them names, yelled, and threatened to fight Perkins. Several also said that Monroe’s yelling, threatening to fire em‐ ployees, and belittling employees had been going on for quite some time. Edward (Eddie) Sellers, the employee with a hear‐ ing impairment, said that Monroe made him feel bad for ask‐ ing Monroe to repeat an assignment when Sellers did not hear 2 Although Monroe did not actually meet with a therapist for the first time until January 29, 2013, he testified at his deposition that in speaking with people over the phone to make an appointment for therapy, he was told that it sounded like he had PTSD and depression. 6 No. 16‐1959 him initially, that Monroe told him he should wear a “bell‐ tone” referring to Sellers’ “lack of hearing,” and that Monroe disciplined him like a child. On January 29, Monroe was interviewed about the allega‐ tions made against him. Monroe stated he had PTSD and de‐ pression that affected his sleep. He said not getting sleep caused him to get frustrated easily, although he denied using profanity or blowing up on January 24. He said, “I don’t han‐ dle Eddie [Sellers] like I should – [I] talk[] real slow to him.” As the investigation continued, a number of other employ‐ ees and former employees were also interviewed regarding their experiences with Monroe. The eleven current crew members reporting to Monroe that had not already given written statements were interviewed and only three had pri‐ marily positive things to say about him. The rest had either mixed or mostly negative comments including that Monroe was testy, intimidating, volatile, demeaning, militaristic, and disrespectful. Some also reported that Monroe threatened their jobs and that he made fun of Sellers. Eight former em‐ ployees were also interviewed. A few said they never had a problem with Monroe, but others said working for Monroe was stressful, that he would have outbursts and be demean‐ ing, and that he used military methods to get the work done. When the investigation was completed, Neuman, Brooks, George, and Brandye Hendrickson, who was then District Deputy Commissioner, met to discuss what action to take. Ac‐ cording to Neuman, they believed “it wasn’t clear whether the diagnosis [of PTSD] was legitimate or not …” because Monroe obtained the diagnosis right after a number of em‐ ployees had complained about him and because Monroe did not produce documentation or even explain where he had No. 16‐1959 7 gotten the diagnosis. The attendees at the meeting unani‐ mously agreed that Monroe should be terminated. Monroe was discharged on February 4, 2013 for “consistently ex‐ hibit[ing] hostile and intimidating behavior in the execution of [his] responsibilities to the employees … assigned to [his] supervision.”