Opinion ID: 203405
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: 2003 Evaluations and Vélez's Arrival

Text: In February 2004, a year before the employment termination, Abadía completed 2003 year-end evaluations for all of the employees under his supervision. We consider these evaluations by Abadía insofar as they provide relevant background. Abadía's evaluation of García, which they both signed on February 18, 2004, was markedly less positive than his evaluations of others he supervised. In García's evaluation, which reflected comments from others about García, including from female employees, he wrote: Norys is a hard worker but needs to learn how to influence the organization in a positive way to get the job done with a level of comfort. She is good at planning but when she encounters a pushback in the way she is approaching the task she gets upset and is able to accept alternate solutions with a level of difficulty. Her way is the best way... Norys needs to understand that be[ing] a team player within our environment is an important factor.... Professionals that have worked with her feel uncomfortable in the way she approaches conflicting differences. She needs to be more proactive in modeling BMS Core Behaviors.... Another area that Norys has to address is in the presentation skills. While she has the required information her presentation lacks the required structure to make sure that attendees can grasp the understanding of the subject at hand.... In a sworn statement, Abadía stated that his review of García was based on his observations that when she encountered resistance to differing opinions or suggestions, she would have difficulty receiving that feedback and would respond by getting upset and reacting as such. He also noted that García had been inadequately prepared for a presentation to the plant's Vice President and General Manager in late 2003, which Abadía had to cancel because it was lacking the appropriate structure or completeness. As discussed below, García wrote a letter on August 4, 2004, complaining about several aspects of this evaluation, including Abadía's reliance on the opinions of people with whom García claimed she had not actually worked during the time period in question. By contrast, Abadía had far fewer concerns about other employees in the department. His evaluations of Toro and Orsini, García's male co-workers, were overwhelmingly positive, and his evaluation of Sánchez expressed a few concerns but was still very strong: Within the 7 months that I have worked with Eduardo he needs to be more reactive to resolving situations that come to his hand but also increase the level of pro-activeness to resolve situations before they become a problem. Eduardo has the technical talent and also the administrative expertise to climb to his next performance step. Eduardo with his knowledge and expertise... can do more to increase the level of effectiveness of this department and for the overall organization. [He i]s considered within our operational community to be an[ ] excellent person to document [c]apital preparation documents the correct way. García considers Sánchez to be her male comparator. In February 2004, Abadía was promoted to Director of Manufacturing and was replaced as Director of Facilities and Engineering by Rafael Vélez. Vélez had previously served as Materials Manager and worked with García in that capacity; García characterized that working relationship as normal and did not indicate that there had been any problems between the two. Vélez testified that he had known García since he started working at BMS in approximately 1993. In a sworn statement, Vélez stated that after his appointment as Director of Facilities and Engineering, he was informed that an internal audit had revealed deficiencies in the carrying out and documentation of equipment qualifications. These had been García's responsibility both as Senior Project Engineer and before that when she was Senior Qualification Engineer. As a result, BMS had transferred responsibility for the qualification process away from García. On April 23, 2004, Vélez placed a warning letter in García's file critical of her job performance due to inappropriate administrative controls. The letter stated that García had violated several BMS internal procedures. On April 1, she had brought to Vélez's attention the need to extend a purchase order for an additional $30,000 to cover both a performance qualification for four lyophilizers and the process qualification for an external vial washer. On April 16, Vélez had learned that the qualification of the external washer had in fact been awarded as part of a previous change order, and also that three prior changes, all of which had included the lyophilizers, had also been made against the purchase order. As a result of all these changes, the original contract had increased from $20,000 to $88,950. Vélez's letter constituted an official warning, and cautioned García to take immediate corrective action to prevent this situation from recurring and to exercise sound judgment when administering contract, terms and conditions set forth in Company internal controls. From Vélez's point of view, García's performance did not improve. García claims that she was not aware of the April 2004 warning letter until her deposition in this case, but she does not dispute the existence of the underlying cost overrun.