[Vendorsmi] Where Do You see Yourself in "active participation"? Something to ponder

Tue Jun 19 14:53:45 UTC 2012

The following is being offered for the sole purpose of discussion of the
philosophical and dynamics of organizational function or dysfunction that I
set forth below. I encourage opposing or similar viewpoints.  This is
intended for self-evaluation and self-reflection for the betterment of the
whole community.  It does not carry with this writing any evaluation or
opinion of other information contained herein, as such information is
presented solely to give context to why I offer my essay for discussion of
the organizational dynamics that ultimately affect all persons within the
organization. 

This exercise and discussion is typical of the question and discussion in a
university-level principles of ethics course or corporate training seminar.

Hey Bill,

I do not know the facts surrounding Risa getting the Howell facility in the
first place, so I cannot comment on that situation, except to say that
assuming what you say is true, it exactly makes my earlier point about rules
not being followed, and the simple fact that someone is ultimately going to
get trampled and injured, for failure to follow the rule of law.

It is, in my opinion, the failure of blind licensees to not prosecute valid
claims of rule violations that has created a culture and environment within
the BEP which has fostered an attitude by BEP management and a few select
licensee, for personal reasons alone, simply sit back on their hands and
allow the illegal and unethical actions to occur, and gibing the violators
an attitude that they can repeat such biolations over and over because the
know that are likely not to be challenged by the blind, as was apparently
true in your case of not being awarded Howell.

Bill, truly the answer to addressing corruption is not to turn one's head as
if to not see the corruption, but rather to face  head-on and stare down the
evil one witnesses.  To sit back and pretend to believe that failure to
confront and address the corruption and evil, believing it is noble to not
defend one's rights for the good or sake of anotheris simplyfurther promotes
future evil acts by the original wrong-doer, ultimately injuring a much
longer list of individuals in the future.  That is the ultimate result when
a seemingly noble act of not appropriately acting does to advance corruption
and evil.

Bill, over the years, I have seen many intelligent, morally upright,
well-intentioned blind person come and go from the BEP operator "active
participation" scene.  In my opinion and observation, the vast majority exit
the scene believing that they as an individual cannot have or make a
positive impact on that which is corrupt or evil. A fewer number decide to
"go-along-to get-along", because they relize the "price" or "cost" to them
and their future materialism is much too expensive for doing that which is
right and just.  The individuals have witnessed not only the corruption and
evil, they also have either seen and/or experienced the further corruption
and evil associated with retaliation and retribution for the courageto stand
up for what is right and just, and stand firm against corruption and evil.
Then there are a much smaller group of individuals I call the "sell-outs",
or as they are likely to define themselves as the "opportunity seekers".
These are the ones that believe that "survival of the fittest" or
"eat-others-before-you get-eaten", is the only method of survival in the
daily jungle of life, for after all, it truly is a jungle out there in
business, and one certainly must fend for one's self, if one is to get-ahead
and survive, they truly believe.  This minority in any organization tends to
cozy up to the leader of the pack, knowing that there is strength in
numbers, and that sticking together one can truly survive.  It is the
attitude of rugged individualism, "what's in it for me", and "I've got your
back, and you've got my back, and the "rules are there for others to follow,
but not me" system of operation.  In their jungle-environment mind, it is
not in their best interest to act in the best interest of the entire jungle
inhabitants.  Each and every one in the pack prowl the intense jungle to
capture that which will fulfill their personal needs, of course at the cost
of the less connected and astute members of the community.  Then, as I once
heard it described by one blind individual, the individual pack members drag
their captured bounty back to their cave, disappearing and not being seen,
as they savor the pleasure of their rugged individualism andhedonism, while
doing the most minimal to preserve and protect that which they have gained,
at a huge cost to the entire organization.  There is no longer any reason to
stick around for the good, right and just benefit of the majority of the
members of the organization.

Finally, there are an even more tiny minority that get involved, stay
involved, and confront and stare down corruption and evil at any personal
cost, simply and authentically because it is the only noble, moral, right
and just approach and action to take.  I can think of a few blind persons,
formerly employed within the BEP that fit within this tiny minority of blind
persons willing to act on behalf of all blind individuals, despite the cost
personally.  .  

Where do you see yourself within this organizational structure in BEP?

Best regards,

Terry Eagle                

  _____  

From: Bill Lozier 
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 4:19 PM
To:Terry D. Eagle
Subject: RE: Howell Rest area

One more thing Terry, Risa was illegally given howell in the first damm
place.  I was number one on that bid, and your buddy fred and connie screwed
me out of it, you know why, becouse they liked risa more then me!!! AND THAT
IS A FACT TERRY      But did i cry like a baby and try to take down another
operator.  No i pulled up my pants and moved on.  Time for risa to do the
same.

  _____  

From:Terry D. Eagle
To:Bill Lozier 
Subject: RE: Howell Rest area
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:57:06 -0400

Dear Bill,

Obviously you are misinformed and ill-equipped with regard to the facts of
the case acted upon by the MCB Board on Friday.  The action taken by the MCB
Board was acted upon on behalf of the "PETITIONER" in the case No.:
2009-1705, and as the representative in that case, and I don't recall
Marlene Rothenhauser being neither the "PETITIONER", nor the licensee with
whom I have a valid representative agreement in that case.  You clearly must
have confused the case of which you reference and the case in which I
represented Ms. Rothenhauser's brother, Mr. Mark Rothenhauser.  I simply
point out your confusion so that you are aware that Ms. Rothenhauser was not
a "PARTY" to Case No. 2009-1705, therefore, Ms. Rothenhauser has no legal
"STANDING", with relation to the MCB Board's final agency decision and
resulting benefit to Mrs. Patrick-Langtry.

It is amirable that you desire to represent Ms. Rothenhauser on her claim of
grievance against the BEP, as they clearly acted contrary to past practice
of not assigning a permanent licensee to a vending facility during the
pendency of a grievance involving a vending facility, wish was itself a
discriminatory act toward Ms. Patrick-Langtry, and detrimental to Ms.
Rotherhauser as well.

It is also notable that the SLA failed to follow the BEP Adminisrative
Rules, with regard to the assignment of Ms. Rothenhauser to the Howell
Vending Facility, as Ms. Rothenhauser was not eligible for a promotion or
transfer to another vending facility, at the time of the bid, award of the
bid, or the transfer date, thus Ms. Rotthenhauser simply does not hold a
valid vending facility license to the Howell vending facility.

Given these facts, I can see and certainly empathsize with Ms. Rothenhauser
and you being upset, frustrated, and even angry at the illegal actions of
the BEP management, as I too have witnessed too many such actions, and
successfully represented the vast majority of licensees affected by such
senseless and illegal acts by the BEP management, as well as Mr. Cannon.

I too agree that there is, as you say, "cheating" going on, but it certainly
is not on the part of Ms. Patrick-Langtry.  Rather, the"cheating" that is
ongoing is on the part of the BEP management, mostly with their practice of
favoritism for certain individuals, and discriminationagainst other
individuals.  In reality, there is another more suddle form of "cheating"
going on by the illegal, favoritism, and, discriminatory acts of the BEP
management, and that "cheating" is in the form of ALL licensees and blind
individuals being "cheated" of a high quality business income-producing
program.  Therfore, your placement of "cheating" is misplaced, Sir.

For the past five years, my clear and consistent chant has been for all, SLA
and Blind licenseea alike, to "simply follow the rule of law", and no one
would get hurt in the day-to-day process of operation of the program.  Until
such is done, someone is bound to be trampled and injurwd.  Unfortunately,
in this instance, the BEP hastrampled and injured both Mrs. Patrick-Langtry
and Ms. Rothenhauser, simply by running without following the rules,
established to prevent just such injury, I believe you will agree, once you
know and examine the facts involved.

I wish you the best in your representation of Ms. Rothenhauser, in what is
certainly a no-win situation.

Best regards,

Terry Eagle    

  _____  

From: Bill Lozier 
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 8:24 AM
Subject: Howell Rest area

Good Morning Everyone,

       I know everyone is very interested in the ruling involving the howell
rest area at the recent Commission board meeting.  First off I would like to
inform everyone that Marlene Rotherhauser has asked me to be her
representative in this matter so please forward any relevant information  on
this case to me.  Secondly I would personally like to thank Risa for her
interest in and dedication to our program.    And third but not least since
the ruling by an administrative law judge was upheld by the Commission Board
clearly states that the Okomas vending route should be added to the
howell/Novi vending route.   And since Marlene Rothenhousre is the current
operator that is licensed by the state of Michigan to operate the howell
rest areas, we would like to know when the Okomas route will be added to her
howell rest area?  

        As I said earlier i would like thank Risa for her dedication to this
site and for her continuing to  fight for it even after she voluntarily gave
up  the license to operate it.   Risa should be commended for her relentless
fight to help marlene make the site  a economic success.  To give up her own
location to help another operator is totally commendable.  But all thanks
aside when can we expect this to be signed over to Marlene?   We hope it can
be done as quickly as possible  so Marlene can take advantage of the short
summer season. 

     When Risa voluntarily gave up her license to operate howell/novi rest
she ,gave up all rights to that location including any that are being added
now.  The grievance that was filed was filed on behalf of the location not
the individual operator, Risa personally did not win anything, the operator
that is currently being licensed by the state of michigan to operate that
howell faculty won!!!!!  Ask Fred he knows!!  What happens to Risa?  we
really do not care, as it is very clear she was willing to hurt and destroy
anyone as long as she got hers.  If she believed in her case that much she
should have never left howell and waited for Okamos to be delivered to her.
But of course she choose to be greedy and try to get the biggest piece of
the pie before it was officially served.  Shame on her and anyone else
involved in this.  It is greed and thoughtless actions like this that are
bringing unwanted negative attention to our program.  I hope this serves as
a lesson to all who what to try and cheat their way in life, be careful what
you wish for, you might get it. 

      Marlene Rothenhouser is  legally licensed by the state of Michigan to
operate the BEP faculty located at  the Howell/Novi rest areas.   She is in
compliance and in good standing with the SLA.  There is absolutely no reason
or no way for her license to be revoked.  No where in the propagated rules
dose it say that an operator can be removed  from a facility in order to
give that facility to another operator.  Again Marlene is in good standing
with the SLA and has done nothing wrong, she has fallowed all the rules and
promoted into this location legally a year and a half ago.  There is no
reason to  penalize her or revoke her license, she has done absolutely
nothing wrong and will fight to the bitter end to save job her job and her
home.   This decision is a complete violation of our propagated rules and
will not hold water when all sides are heard and given a chance to speak.  I
might add that marlene has never given testimony and never been given a
chance to speak on this.  This has all been done behind closed doors and in
secret!!! 

     If risa now wants the howell rest area added to okamos then she need to
start all over, file a grievance saying she wants it that way.  For now
Okamos goes with howell, Marlene is the legal licensed operator for Howell.
Please forward this to Risa i do not have her e-mail.

Sincerely

Bill Lozier

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120619/1934a663/attachment.html>