REBUTTALS TO BRNS ASSERTIONS

On or about July 2021, the BRN interviewed Plaintiff. BRN then received Plaintiff’s complete medical record on August 3, 2021. Upon receiving Plaintiff’s records, the Board found no issue. Nowhere in Plaintiff’s history of nursing was there any record of bad patient care or any medical errors.

Plaintiff has a recommendation letter sent by Julie Bonsack, Plaintiff’s travel nurse recruiter on July 22, 2022. (Exhibit 56- Julie Bonsack’s letter). In the letter, Julie stated that Plaintiff received a good recommendation from supervisor Jennifer Ty. Julie further quoted Jennifer Ty, who stated expressed their thrill to have Plaintiff work with them, and that they would love to keep or have her come back as the need arises.

Plaintiff also received a letter on July 25, 2022 from Cheyenne Haggard, her recruiter. (Exhibit 58- Cheyenne’s Letter). In the letter, Cheyenne acknowledged that Plaintiff had worked with her as a travel nurse at Clovis Community Medical Center, Clovis, CA. She further noted that Plaintiff had received good recommendations from her supervisor Jennifer Tyo, Laura Benesch at Palmdale Regional, and Natalie P, a Charge RN at Clovis Community Medical Center. The said individuals were excited to work with Plaintiff.

On March 11, 2021, Jennifer Tyo, Plaintiff’s supervisor at Providence Little Company of Mary San Pedro, noted that Plaintiff has been able to maintain a composed demeanor, even working in stressful situations. (Exhibit 47- Jennifer Tyo’s letter).

On March 21, 2023, Plaintiff received a verification of employment from Danelle Manderfeld. (Exhibit 62-Danelle’s letter). In the letter, Danelle stated that Plaintiff met the requirements for her job and qualified for rehire with Atlas Medstaff.

Further, on April 27, 2022, Tina Griffith wrote a recommendation letter, where she noted that Plaintiff was a self-starter, reliable, and excelled under pressure. (Exhibit 60- Tina Griffith’s letter).

Plaintiff then met with the HR, where she discussed her concerns regarding Mr. Edwards. (Exhibit 4- Email from HR- July 2020).

The staff and management of Kaiser then started making the false allegations against Plaintiff, that she is not mentally capable of fulfilling her duties. (Exhibit 5- Text Message from Michael Zackos; Exhibit 6- Email from HR regarding the August 28^th dismissal; Exhibit 7- Email from Michael Zackos; Exhibit 8- Email regarding sick hours).

On or about September 9, 2020, an EEOC investigator, Lourdes Keppel, contacted Plaintiff and advised her that she was investigating her complaint and would reach out to her shortly. In the meantime, Plaintiff continued to receive phone calls from a few of her co- workers advising her that Xavier Edwards was continuing to spread rumors about her, claiming that she was psychotic and that she was mentally unstable. (Exhibit 18- Email from EEOC investigation; Exhibit 19- EEOC investigation fact sheet; Exhibit 20- Email from EEOC investigator; Exhibit 25- Email to EEOC Investigator; Exhibit 31- Email to EEOC investigator regarding closing of investigations; Exhibit 41- EEOC Conclusion to Investigation).

On January 29, 2021, Plaintiff was denied her accommodation request. (Exhibit 43- Kaiser Denies Accommodation request). On February 11, 2021, a Clarification Note was sent to the HR. The note stated that Plaintiff had no specific functional limitations that would preclude her from performing her nursing duties. (Exhibit 44- Clarification Notice sent to the HR). The foregoing notwithstanding, the HR still maintained that they would engage a third-party healthcare to perform a medical assessment on Plaintiff. (Exhibit 45- HR response to clarification note). The HR further stated that Plaintiff would further remain on unpaid medical leave.

Plaintiff believes that these actions by the management at Kaiser were acts of retaliation against her and their effort to portray Plaintiff as mentally unbalanced because she had complained about bullying by her co-worker, Xavier Edwards. Furthermore, Plaintiff believes that her mistreatment was substantially motivated by hostility to her ethnic background and foreign accent, and for this reason, the staff at Kaizer attempted to portray Plaintiff as having suffered a psychotic break and also portray her as unfit to work as a registered nurse.

Further, having been subjected to a fitness for duty examination, the Emergency Room Physician issued an assessment note, which provided inter alia, that Plaintiff is cognitively intact, and has the mental capacity to perform her duties. (Exhibit 49- Emergency Room Physician Assessment Note; Exhibit 50- Email to HR regarding fitness for duty examination).

Plaintiff maintains that the BRN’s resort to subjecting her to the examination was an unduly intrusive means of determining her mental condition.  First, Kaiser’s fitness for duty policy provides that there must be evidence for the inability to perform the requirements of the job. If there is no such evidence, there is no basis for a fitness for duty examination. (Exhibit 13- Fitness for Duty Policy).

Next, as Plaintiff already stated, the BRN had already interviewed her, and accessed her medical records, but never found any issue with Plaintiff’s record. Nowhere in Respondent’s history of nursing was there any record of bad patient care or any medical errors. Besides, Plaintiff attests that the Board made no attempt to ascertain the veracity of the allegations made against her. Instead, the Board’s first step was to order Plaintiff to a Section 820 examination.

Plaintiff further states that the mere fact that the Board sent her an Order compelling her to undergo a Section 820 examination, was an excess of the Board’s powers. As already stated, the Board is bound to first resort to less intrusive means, before subjecting licentiates to Section 820 examinations.

Plaintiff further asserts that Loretta Melby will need to be examined for making the said averments.

In a subsequent meeting on November 10^th, there was no mention of the August 28, 2020, incident. During that November 10^th meeting, the management focused on getting Plaintiff to sign the suspension letter, or ultimately face escalating disciplinary actions that would lead to immediate termination. Knowing that their actions were wrong both legally and morally, Plaintiff continued to refuse to sign any suspension letters, as it was evident this was a sly cover-up for the verbal dismissal on August 28, 2020. Plaintiff’s suspension letter was then increased to level 3. (Exhibit 29- Increase of Suspension to level 3; Exhibit 30- Level 3 Suspension letter). Despite being pressured, bullied, intimidated and being the recipient of intense fear tactics to sign the suspension letter during the November 10^th meeting, Plaintiff still refused. Due to this, the management had targeted and effectively terminated Plaintiff’s employment as of November 10, 2020. (Exhibit 11- Email to HR- September 1, 2020; Exhibit 12- Second Email to HR; Exhibit 15- Email to Poetter regarding returning to work).

Further, after Kaiser received the psychologist notes on December 29, 2020, the HR sent Plaintiff a letter. (Exhibit 42- HR Response to clearance note). In the response, the HR refused to acknowledge the observations of the psychologist and instead determined not to send Plaintiff back to her work.

Plaintiff further asserts that the distress emails were sent in November 2020, after the last meeting with the HR on November 10, 2020, which caused Plaintiff so much distress that she was forced to seek therapy to cope with the mental anguish and emotional trauma. (Exhibit 26- Plaintiff schedules therapy; Exhibit 27- Therapy appointment; Exhibit 28- Therapy appointment; Exhibit 31- Therapy appointment letter; Exhibit 32- Therapy appointment letter).

Plaintiff further asserts that the BRN was notified that the chosen psychiatrist, appeared to be confused and objected to be evaluated by a confused individual to which no response was received and BRN proceeded to revoke Plaintiff’s RN license.

It is therefore Plaintiff’s assertion that the vileness of this statement goes to show just how racist and evil these people are. They caused the distress then to use it to shame her. A truly unstable person will not survive this level of psychological assault and mental anguish.