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

Tue Jun 19 19:05:16 UTC 2012

First class, first in class!  The Commission Board made it clear that it has had enough of the failed management style that defines the BEP and is demanding  positive change, even if that means dealing with painful realities such as Howell/Okemos. I'm waiting for the day when BEP management is forced to explain why it created a super route for the operator who obtained evidence of criminal action on the part of the assistant program manager, while failing to make a logical and necessary change for the sake of keeping another facility healthy and economically viable.

I feel for both operators in this mess; I feel nothing but contempt for BEP royalty, managers, current love interests and sellout operators.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Terry Eagle 
  To: 'NFB of Michigan Vendors List' 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 10:53
  Subject: [Vendorsmi] Where Do You see Yourself in "active participation"?Something to ponder

  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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  Vendorsmi mailing list
  Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Vendorsmi:
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/suncat0%40gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120619/3836faca/attachment.html>