Complaint Review: Tropicana Tropicana Products Tropicana Manufacturing PepsiCo Pepsi QTG Quaker Gatorade - Bradenton Florida

Steve --- It's not unlike you to lie or give false statements. You have already proven that in the past. So how do we know that you are telling the truth other than we will just have to take your word for it.

I am aware of confidentiality clauses. Just as I think it is funny that when someone from Tropicana told you to watch what you say you ignored them complaining that your right to free speech was being violated.

To Steven - Jacksonville, Regarding your statement [below], I'm sorry to inform you that you are once again, WRONG!! What gave you the idea that you were right? You are absolutely CLUELESS, as are most management/company shills on this thread. FYI...In MOST cases when a case such as this is "settled" or "disposed of" or however it is done, it is STANDARD PRACTICE to enter into a "confidential settlement agreement". Use your imagination here, as that is all I can legally say. What part of CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT do you not understand? [Not saying I signed one, or that one exists]. As stated earlier. Case closed. Settled. That's all you need to know. And, I didn't lose anything. I'm taking a couple of years off. Early retirement. Go back to your cubicle now! You really need to learn how to read and comprehend before spouting jibberish. You have continuously confused the issues, and the timelines of events. PAY ATTENTION!!! >>> Submitted: 4/8/2009 1:57:40 PM Modified: 4/8/2009 3:33:31 PM Steven Jacksonville, Florida U.S.A. Nice to know I am right Steve you can't prove you won anything because you didn't. How was this matter resolved last anyone heard you have to sue in civil court to get your job back -- how is that resolved. >>>

Steve you can't prove you won anything because you didn't. How was this matter resolved last anyone heard you have to sue in civil court to get your job back -- how is that resolved.

Steven, I have told you this before, and will tell you once again. YOU need to learn how to READ and COMPREHEND before you go on to slamming someone. ***FYI...ALL MATTERS HAVE BEEN RESOLVED...Therefore, I cannot legally discuss with you anything else regarding this issue or any other issue I had with Tropicana/PepsiCo companies or representatives***. IT IS OVER. Is there any part of this you do not understand?? This means that I CANNOT and WILL NOT post anything else about any of these companies or representatives of said companies. YOU are not worth it. Furthermore, I have not posted any "half truths" or "falsehood" as you claim. You are just too stupid to read and comprehend what was actually written, and what the actual issues were. That is the only problem here. You are ignorant. You are too stupid to realize that there were several different periods of time and 3 different cases/incidents covered by my posts here on ROR. YOU have confused the issues at hand by mixing the issues and timelines. You are a genuine tool. So, go back to your cubicle and play with yourself or something. Or hit that crack pipe some more. But leave me alone. You are a stalker, and probably a child molester too as you have all of the qualities and traits. >>> Submitted: 3/6/2009 7:06:06 PM Modified: 3/6/2009 7:10:44 PM Steven Jacksonville, Florida U.S.A. another half truth or falsehood from Steve Thanks for the update Steve. I went to the DOL website and copied the following: Charges can be resolved at any part of the investigation before we make a determination. The company and the charging party who filed a charge are given the opportunity to try to resolve the charge. Another new option that you can try to resolve a charge is the alternative dispute resolution process, which is new to the commission. It's the ADR process. Both parties, the charging party and the company, are given the opportunity to resolve the charge for mediation. If they opt to go that route, that charge is assigned to a neutral mediator where a hearing, a mediation is held. That is -- that phase of the investigation is the beginning of the investigation and is a confidential process. If that charge is resolved during mediation, then the charge doesn't go to investigation. If -- if it is not resolved, then it goes to our enforcement unit where we investigate that, but any of the discussions, any of the -- of the discussions that -- that go through the mediation process are separate and apart of the investigation, and they're confidential. And we are very excited about this new process, because we believe that charges can be resolved early if both parties are willing to go through the mediation process. If we find, based on the allegation, based on the evidence that we obtain, that there is no evidence -- that doesn't necessarily mean that there is no discrimination or it didn't occur, but we didn't find enough evidence to support your allegation, then you the charging party are issued a dismissal and a notice of right to sue, and you have another option. You still have another avenue. You can pursue and file federal suit in court within 90 days of the issuance of the notice of right to sue, but if we do find a violation and if we're not able to -- to resolve the charge, then the Commission reviews the charge for possible filing suit on your behalf. So the next question would be did you file a federal suit against Tropicana within 30 days???? No didn't think so. Is the union providing an attorney for this claim?? No??? Didn't think so. What about DOL filing charges on your behalf??? Whats really funny is this tidbit of info pertaining to your claims that you returned from work after being wrongfully suspended and receiving back pay for the time you were out: 'The agreement of any employee to accept back wages paid under DOL's supervision shall upon payment in full constitute a waiver by such employee ..." So was this problem with being wrongfully suspended involved with your DOL claim. Then if you were offered the back pay and received the pay would be a waiver on your part from pursuing the claim.

Thanks for the update Steve. I went to the DOL website and copied the following: Charges can be resolved at any part of the investigation before we make a determination. The company and the charging party who filed a charge are given the opportunity to try to resolve the charge. Another new option that you can try to resolve a charge is the alternative dispute resolution process, which is new to the commission. It's the ADR process. Both parties, the charging party and the company, are given the opportunity to resolve the charge for mediation. If they opt to go that route, that charge is assigned to a neutral mediator where a hearing, a mediation is held. That is -- that phase of the investigation is the beginning of the investigation and is a confidential process. If that charge is resolved during mediation, then the charge doesn't go to investigation. If -- if it is not resolved, then it goes to our enforcement unit where we investigate that, but any of the discussions, any of the -- of the discussions that -- that go through the mediation process are separate and apart of the investigation, and they're confidential. And we are very excited about this new process, because we believe that charges can be resolved early if both parties are willing to go through the mediation process. If we find, based on the allegation, based on the evidence that we obtain, that there is no evidence -- that doesn't necessarily mean that there is no discrimination or it didn't occur, but we didn't find enough evidence to support your allegation, then you the charging party are issued a dismissal and a notice of right to sue, and you have another option. You still have another avenue. You can pursue and file federal suit in court within 90 days of the issuance of the notice of right to sue, but if we do find a violation and if we're not able to -- to resolve the charge, then the Commission reviews the charge for possible filing suit on your behalf. So the next question would be did you file a federal suit against Tropicana within 30 days???? No didn't think so. Is the union providing an attorney for this claim?? No??? Didn't think so. What about DOL filing charges on your behalf??? Whats really funny is this tidbit of info pertaining to your claims that you returned from work after being wrongfully suspended and receiving back pay for the time you were out: "The agreement of any employee to accept back wages paid under DOL's supervision shall upon payment in full constitute a waiver by such employee ... So was this problem with being wrongfully suspended involved with your DOL claim. Then if you were offered the back pay and received the pay would be a waiver on your part from pursuing the claim.

Steven, You are dead wrong on the "right to sue" determination. Here's how it works. Upon completion of any investigation by any division the USDOL it goes one of two ways. 1. Allegations unfounded. Case closed. No "right to sue" determinations. 2. Allegations have merit. Case closed. Right to sue determination issued ONLY upon request of the complaining party. It is NOT automatic. Furthermore, The USDOL no longer provides any factual case data or specifics with any right to sue determination. That policy has been changed. All they do is attach the original complaint to the right to sue. That's it. If a complaint has no merit, and is deemed to be unfounded, no "right to sue" letter will be issued.

That's outrageous. Tropicana fired Kahreem and the union was able to get him back on the job despite the fact that according to you it is against Tropicana policy that is working there anyway. I checked into the "Right to Sue" letter Steve. Turns out you would have been given one regardless of the findings. But please scan a copy of the letter and let us see what the findings were of their investigation. Also not to be a party pooper Steve but it is the right of any party to appeal to a civil court the findings of an arbitration. That being said, judges tend to get annoyed when the losing party does so and will not overturn the ruling of the arbitration unless there is a possibility that the arbitrator is biased. I would think that if there was no bias involved that the union would gladly spring for your attorney bills since if you won the civil case as well Tropicana would have to pay your attorney fees and/or court costs as well. Congratulations though

Well, several things have transpired here. I was ordered by the arbitrator on the case to stay off here until a decision was rendered. It was..this week..In my favor! I won, but Tropicana / PepsiCo management BILL WOOLSTON / JAVIER FELICIANO / others chose to IGNORE the order of those official procedings and appeal to civil court! Just another case of big business demonstrating the attitude that they are "above the law". Also, on 10-23-2007 the USDOL ruled in my favor as well and issued a RIGHT TO SUE letter. Jenny Williams, HR Director for PepsiCo at Tropicana was FIRED about a month ago, as was her husband Kahreem Williams! I guess the "official" save face terminology that was used was she got "packaged out". Yeah, OK. If you say so. It's still GONE in my book. This is a funny thing. Almost everyone who was involved in my case has been fired or relocated, or has action pending! I guess PepsiCo is doing damage control. Javier is getting "relocated" to PHOENIX! And it does not appear to me to be a promotion! Just my opinion. I'll keep you posted.

That is much better Steven. Stay out of the attack mode from now on. You actually made a relevant post this time! Congratulations on your new skill.

Thought I put something here one time. Oh well must of gotten misplaced. Well Steve I think it is indeed atrocious that a child molester was hired on and is given preference over you. But a couple of questions. How old is Jenny?? Any chance she was the child involved?? I would imagine that Tropicana was nervous about not hiring back a black person since in 2004 didn't the lose a lawsuit for failing to hire back someone because they were black??? Maybe that was still fresh in their minds and they didn't want another one (or the potential). In another post didn't you reference another part of Tropicana in Tampa that says that hiring convicted felons is not permitted??? Please post a copy of that regulation or rule. Does it specify which ex-cons cannot be hired?? Reason I asked is because there was an issue here in Jax pertaining to the longshoremen that had been convicted of felonies. Seems that one of the Homeland Security Act laws extended the wait time that a ex-con felon could work on the docks was extended from 5 years to 7 years. I would think maybe if the division of Tropicana you were referencing dealt with going into the port area that they would not hire convicted felons just so they wouldn't have to deal with the laws. Hang in there buddy. I am sure your patience will pay off in the end.

Steve Your information is not totally true. You have small pieces to the puzzle but not the hole picture. I would suggest you stop making the accusations you are as they are not accurate.

Steven-Jacksonville, Well, I'm still waiting for you to try and justify this one. This guy engaged in a sexual felony against a child under the age of 12 while he was working at Tropicana. He was in Quality Control at the time, a salaried employee, and with Jenny [Jordan] Williams, Tropicana HR Management. He was convicted and incarcerated. Upon release, and while on felony probation and registered as a sex offender, he was re-hired as an hourly employee at Tropicana. Tropicana fabricated the seniority list and placed this guy in the Distribution Center, maintaining his old seniority! He should have never been re-hired in the first place as it is/was the policy of Tropicana at that time not to hire/re-hire felons. And, it is also a violation of PepsiCo's worldwide code of conduct. But, special preference [accomodation] was given to this sexual predator over a Disabled Veteran. I'll be waiting on your response and "justification" on this one.