US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
NEWS: Corruption in Massachusetts Commision Against Discrimination MCAD (english)
03 Nov 2003
MCAD cost too much money to the taxpayer to have in it, corrupt people deceiving mass residents and employees. Mass governor, Mitt Romney need set order in this agency. it need to be done now...
To: TOM REILLY
Attorney General
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108-1698

Reference: Complain against MCAD members and investigators

Date: October 21, 2003

I would like you to open an investigation in this serious problem with the members of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD). It seems to be that they are involved in malpractice in doing their jobs or either getting paid under the table by lawyers or big companies. They come across as slackers, lazy people, and setting a bad precedent, making injustices at MCAD. There is some kind of corruption damaging the job of MCAD.

On September 2, 2000, I filed a complaint, M.C.A.D. Docket No 00133290, against the company I used to work, Mega Communications Inc. address: 529 Main Street, Suite 200, Charlestown, Mass. 02129) for willfully violating the Massachusetts laws, Chapter 151B Section 4, Paragraph 4 (on retaliation) and Chapter 149 Sec 186 Broadcasting
industry; use of non-compete agreements. Mega has also violated federal and state laws regarding overtime pay.

In the October 23rd, 2003 hearing, they (M.C.A.D.) showed that they don't even know state law regarding the use of non-compete agreements. The chief of enforcements said it was legal, but there is a plainly written laws (Chapter 149, Section 186) that it is clearly illegal. And I was approached twice, with intimidation to sign it but I refused.

MCAD twisted my case from discrimination by retaliation and harassment to race discrimination to cover up those abuses and let the company get away unpunished.

This company has repeatedly been violating state and federal laws in several ways. The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination twisted my complaint to be able to grant Mega Communication and its lawyer with a victory.

The real role of the MCAD is to protect and prevent companies from abusing and discriminating their employees. And stop those companies that continually violating Massachusetts and federal laws. Members of MCAD are using it as way to cover up corruption, discrimination, abuse and a way to get extra money for their pockets.

You, Tom Reilly, have to reorganize or disintegrate MCAD agency. It cost at lot of money from Massachusetts taxpayers to be deceived by those who are involved in malpractice in doing their jobs. Until you address those dangerous issues (corruption) that affect our democracy, the MCAD does not have a reason to exist.

It's time to address and correct the malfeasance of MCAD. It has been discredited by those people responsible to deliver justice in it. The MCAD is not making justice, its behavior is just a disaster. Massachusetts residents can not trust MCAD.

They never investigate my case against Mega Communications. They never
went to the company to interview Mega employees. They try to stop me to use a witness (Robert King) in my case to support my charges against this evil company. They just accept the defendant facts as true, not matter if they were lies or false statements. Even I submitted much evidence supporting my case, and the commissioners or investigators have ignored it, in favor of Mega Communications and its lawyer, Mr. Richard Vetstein. This is an obvious case of corruption.

Mega Communications is a company with a very long history of violations. See list and documents MCAD procedures and FCC fines against this evil company in the appendix.

As part of this letter, I have enclosed a c.d. rom from another former employee, Robert King, that will tell you the ways he was treated.

I beg you to investigate all the people related to this case; there is something fishy in it:

Walter J. Sullivan, Jr Esq. Investigating Commissioner
Katherine M. Martin, Esq. Supervisor Compliance Officer
Edward Cassalla, Investigator
Richard Vetstein( Edward & Angell, LLP), Mega's lawyer, who have submitted false statements, on behalf of their client, to the MCAD
101 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110-1800
(617) 439-4444

Sincerely,

FRANK GREER
262 Jackson St,
Lawrence, MA 01841
(978) 682-6089, E-mail: radioguarachita (at) yahoo.com

Cc: David J. Fried, Chief of Enforcement
Mass AFL-CIO
Mass Job with Justice
US Department of Labor
Boston Globe
Boston Herald
Eagle Tribune
Court TV


More incidents:

To: TOM REILLY
Attorney General
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108-1698
Date: 29 October 2003

Dear Mr. Reilly:

This letter is being addressed to you which a recent incident has only proven me right.
Below is a copy of an -e-mail , dated: 10-27-03 which stated the following from the Chief of enforcement at M.C.A.D.:
Mr. Greer:

I won't comment on the allegations in this letter. In the interests of
fairness, however, please note that Mr. Edward Cassella, the original
investigator assigned to your case, passed away suddenly last February.
He worked for MCAD for more than 25 years. No one who has worked at
this agency has been more impartial, knowledgeable, harder-working, or
more respected than Mr. Cassella. We all miss him, and I regret that
you have formed so hasty and superficial an impression.

Thank you.

David J. Fried
Chief of Enforcement.

This only proves that the M.C.A.D. agency is indifferent to my and others' cases. Never was I told in the hearing of 10-23-03, or previous to that of the death Mr. Cassalla . In fact, Mr. David Fried was irate was about a letter of complaint that was sent to his agency because the case was allowed to languish with no follow up.








According to the MCAD receptionist Edward Cassalla, assigned to as investigator in my case against Mega Communication is alive, just got another job, who pass away was his father. Then David Fried is dirty lair and corrupt chief enforcement.

I have also learned that no one from the M.C.A.D. agency has contacted present and former employees at Mega Communications for an investigation. The agency accepted as fact what the Mega attorney wrote to the agency in a December 18th, 2000 letter.

Another point, my records will show that Mega tried to force me to sign a non-compete agreement on two different occasions and I was terminated within two months of their second attempt. Copies of the non-compete agreement are enclosed with this letter.

I would like to remind you that these type of agreements are blatantly illegal and violate M.G.L. Chapter 149, Section 186.

This matter has languished in the system long enough. An investigation is now in order and I need you to get it done with no further excuses from that agency.

Thank you very much for your time in this pressing matter.

Sincerely,

Frank Greer
262 Jackson Street,
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01841.
Telephone: (978) 682-6089.


Cc: David Fried, Chief Enforcement MCAD
Mitt Romney, Mass governor
WATER SULLIVAN
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD












At 02:23 PM 10/28/2003 +0000, you wrote:




---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Mr. Greer:

I won't comment on the allegations in this letter. In the interests of
fairness, however, please note that Mr. Edward Cassella, the original
investigator assigned to your case, passed away suddenly last February.
He worked for MCAD for more than 25 years. No one who has worked at
this agency has been more impartial, knowledgeable, harder-working, or
more respected than Mr. Cassella. We all miss him, and I regret that
you have formed so hasty and superficial an impression.

Thank you.

David J. Fried
Chief of Enforcement.

-----Original Message-----
From: elcanibal (at) juno.com [mailto:elcanibal (at) juno.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 12:05 AM
To: Fried, David (CAD)
Subject: Complain to TOM REILLY Mass Attorney General


To: TOM REILLY
Attorney General
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108-1698

Reference: Complain against MCAD members and investigators

Date: October 21, 2003

I would like you to open an investigation in this serious problem with
the members of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination
(MCAD). It seems to be that they are involved in malpractice in doing
their jobs or either getting paid under the table by lawyers or big
companies. They come across as slackers, lazy people, and setting a bad
precedent, making injustices at MCAD. There is some kind of corruption
damaging the job of MCAD.

On September 2, 2000, I filed a complaint, M.C.A.D. Docket No 00133290,
against the company I used to work, Mega Communications Inc. address:
529 Main Street, Suite 200, Charlestown, Mass. 02129) for willfully
violating the Massachusetts laws, Chapter 151B Section 4, Paragraph 4
(on retaliation) and Chapter 149 Sec 186 Broadcasting
industry; use of non-compete agreements. Mega has also violated federal
and state laws regarding overtime pay.

In the October 23rd, 2003 hearing, they (M.C.A.D.) showed that they
don't even know state law regarding the use of non-compete agreements.
The chief of enforcements said it was legal, but there is a plainly
written laws (Chapter 149, Section 186) that it is clearly illegal. And
I was approached twice, with intimidation to sign it but I refused.

MCAD twisted my case from discrimination by retaliation and harassment
to race discrimination to cover up those abuses and let the company get
away unpunished.

This company has repeatedly been violating state and federal laws in
several ways. The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination
twisted my complaint to be able to grant Mega Communication and its
lawyer with a victory.

The real role of the MCAD is to protect and prevent companies from
abusing and discriminating their employees. And stop those companies
that continually violating Massachusetts and federal laws. Members of
MCAD are using it as way to cover up corruption, discrimination, abuse
and a way to get extra money for their pockets.

You, Tom Reilly, have to reorganize or disintegrate MCAD agency. It cost
at lot of money from Massachusetts taxpayers to be deceived by those who
are involved in malpractice in doing their jobs. Until you address those
dangerous issues (corruption) that affect our democracy, the MCAD does
not have a reason to exist.

It's time to address and correct the malfeasance of MCAD. It has been
discredited by those people responsible to deliver justice in it. The
MCAD is not making justice, its behavior is just a disaster.
Massachusetts residents can not trust MCAD.

They never investigate my case against Mega Communications. They never
went to the company to interview Mega employees. They try to stop me to
use a witness (Robert King) in my case to support my charges against
this evil company. They just accept the defendant facts as true, not
matter if they were lies or false statements. Even I submitted much
evidence supporting my case, and the commissioners or investigators have
ignored it, in favor of Mega Communications and its lawyer, Mr. Richard
Vetstein. This is an obvious case of corruption.

Mega Communications is a company with a very long history of violations.
See list and documents MCAD procedures and FCC fines against this evil
company in the appendix.

As part of this letter, I have enclosed a c.d. rom from another former
employee, Robert King, that will tell you the ways he was treated.

I beg you to investigate all the people related to this case; there is
something fishy in it:

Walter J. Sullivan, Jr Esq. Investigating Commissioner
Katherine M. Martin, Esq. Supervisor Compliance Officer
Edward Cassalla, Investigator
Richard Vetstein, Mega's lawyer, who have submitted false statements, on
behalf of their client, to the MCAD
101 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110-1800
(617) 439-4444

Sincerely,

FRANK GREER
262 Jackson St,
Lawrence, MA 01841
(978) 682-6089, E-mail: radioguarachita (at) yahoo.com

Cc: David J. Fried, Chief of Enforcement
Mass AFL-CIO
Mass Job with Justice
US Department of Labor
Boston Globe
Boston Herald
Eagle Tribune
Court TV










NOTICE



If you have special interest in this case and want more information and
evidences please contact Frank Greer (978) 682-6089 or E-mail:
radioguarachita (at) yahoo.com.






List of Mega Communication violations

Mega Communication is a company that does not respect state or federal
laws, even its own company policies. It has a long history of
violations.

1) Mega Communications August 29, 2003 was fine with $10,000.00
dollars (ten thousand dollars) by Federal Communication Commission (FCC)
for willful violating of Section 17.51(a) of the FCC laws. In the
document issued by David Salomon, Chief Enforcement Bureau stated that
Mega is a liar company that no one can trust.



FCC Document FORFEITURE ORDER File No. EB-01-TP-020:

"6. First, Mega argues that it has a history of overall
compliance with the Commission's Rules. Mega bases this claim on
the assertion that the Commission has never assessed a monetary
forfeiture against Mega, its parent company Mega Communications,
L.L.C, or its ``sister'' companies (other subsidiaries of Mega
Communications, L.L.C.). A search of our records indicates that
the Enforcement Bureau issued eight Notices of Violation to Mega
Communications, L.L.C., and its subsidiaries between April 1,
1999, and April 25, 2001.7 These violations by Mega's parent and
sister companies are part of Mega's violation record. See, e.g.,
KGNT, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 4656 (Enf. Bur., 2001), and Capstar TX
Limited Partnership, 16 FCC Rcd 901 (Enf. Bur., 2001). Mega's
extensive record of violations precludes a determination that
Mega has a history of overall compliance with the Commission's
Rules. See, e.g., Crown Communications, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd 21937
(Enf. Bur., 2000)."


2) On February 14, 2003 Mega Communication was fine with $7,000.00
( Seven thousand dollars) for willful violation of the FCC rules 73.49 .
Notice issued by Vicent F Kajunski, District Director. Boston Office,
Enforcement Bureau:

"5. Based on the evidence before us, we find that on
August 20, 2002, Mega willfully2 and repeatedly3
violated Section 73.49 of the Rules by failing to
provide an effective locked fence or other enclosure
around all their antenna structures."

3) Federal Communication Commission one again fined with $ 1,000.00
(one thousand dollars) Mega Communication on August 2001 for willful
violation of Section 17.51 (a). Fine issued by Jhon E. Rhates,
District Director, Enforcement Bureau. Philadelphia Office:

5. Based on the evidence before us, we find that WEMG
willfully4 and repeatedly5 violated Section 11.35(a) of the
Rules. The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and
Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the
Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17113 (1997), recon.
denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303(1999) (``Forfeiture Policy Statement''),6
sets the base forfeiture amount for failure to maintain required
records at $1,000. In assessing the monetary forfeiture amount,
we must take into account the statutory factors set forth in
Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934,7 (the
``Act''), as amended, which include the nature, circumstances,
extent, and gravity of the violation, and with respect to the
violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior
offenses, ability to pay, and other such matters as justice may
require. Applying the Forfeiture Policy Statement and the
statutory factors to the instant case and applying the inflation
adjustments, we believe that a one thousand dollar ($1,000)
monetary forfeiture is warranted.

4) Mega Communication steal an employee's Wages and Break contract
with its Chief Engineer Robert King, intimidating and harassing him if
he do not accept its unfair term or condition, Even his contract
established in item 3: "For any radio station purchased after signing
this contract, the employee shall receive 15% (fifteen per cent) for
each additional radio station that he must maintain."

"On May 21st, 2002 Mr. Sullivan called me at the Lawrence, Massachusetts
offices and told me very simply that I am to maintain WARE with my
present duties with no extra
pay or I would be fired."


5) Mega Communication violated Massachusetts General Laws,
Chapter151B, Section 4, Paragraph 4 retaliating against its employees
Frank Greer on 11/1/00as soon he communicate his will to fill
discrimination charge against the company, and Robert King on September
30, 2000 when he make a issued an unpaid bunus by the company.

Massachuesstts General Laws established:

"4. For any person, employer, labor organization or employment agency to
discharge, expel or otherwise discriminate against any person because he
has opposed any practices forbidden under this chapter or because he has
filed a complaint, testified or assisted in any proceeding under section
five."



6) Violation Massachusetts Law Chapter 149 Sec 186 Non Compete
Agreement, forcing, intimidating and harassing its employees to sign
this illegal agreement.

"Chapter 149, Section 186: Any contract or agreement which creates or
establishes the terms of employment for an employee or individual in the
broadcasting industry, including, television stations, television
networks, radio stations, radio networks, or any entities affiliated
with the foregoing, and which restricts the right of such employee or
individual to obtain employment in a specified geographic area for a
specified period of time after termination of employment of the employee
by the employer or by termination of the employment relationship by
mutual agreement of the employer and the employee or by termination of
the employment relationship by the expiration of the contract or
agreement, shall be void and unenforceable with respect to such
provision. Whoever violates the provisions of this section shall be
liable for reasonable attorneys' fees "and costs associated with
litigation of an affected employee or individual."

7) Mega repeatedly violate its own personnel policies committing
abuse, discrimination and retaliating against its employees. Robert King
was harassing and retaliated by Mega Communication and its General
Manager Laurindo Muniz when he make a issued an unpaid bunus.

In the section of NON-DISCRIMINATION AND ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICE of its
Company-employee Policy Manual stated:

"Mega Communications, LLC is committed to providing a work environment
that is free of discrimination and harassment. In keeping with this
commitment, the Company maintains a strict policy prohibiting unlawful
discrimination, retaliation, and harassment, including harassment and
discrimination based on race, color, national, origin, national
ancestry, creed, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability,
mental disorder, handicap, marital status, pregnancy, and any other
status protected under state and/or federal law."

8) Top Executives of Mega Communication Alejandro Negron, Program
director and Rafael Grullon, General Supervisor and Laurindo Muniz on
December 8, 1999 and September 7,2000 repeatedly harass and intimidate
Frank Greer for not to sign a Confidentiality and Non Compete Clause
Employment Agreement.

Alejando Negron, thursday 12/9/99 3:14 P.M. Program Director of Mega
Approaching the employee Frank Greer: "If you don't sign you are fired"
Atfer the incident General Manager Rafael Grullon called to a meeting in
his office to discuss the matter and back Mr. Negron up.

9) Mega violate Massachusetts laws chapter 149, Section 186 making
pressure and harassing its employee Frank Greer for not accept or sign a
Non Compete agreement. Agreement presented to the employee after almost
two year of being hired by the company.


"CHAPTER 149. LABOR AND INDUSTRIES.

Chapter 149: Section 186. Broadcasting industry; noncompete agreements.

Section 186. Any contract or agreement which creates or establishes the
terms of employment for an employee or individual in the broadcasting
industry, including, television stations, television networks, radio
stations, radio networks, or any entities affiliated with the
foregoing,
and which restricts the right of such employee or individual to obtain
employment in a specified geographic area for a specified period of
time
after termination of employment of the employee by the employer or by
termination of the employment relationship by mutual agreement of the
employer and the employee or by termination of the employment
relationship
by the expiration of the contract or agreement, shall be void and
unenforceable with respect to such provision. Whoever violates the
provisions of this section shall be liable for reasonable attorneys'
fees
and costs associated with litigation of an affected employee or
individual."

9) Mega Communication cheat its latino clients who advertise on
mega stations with false promises and over charge, several complain have
been issued against the company.

10) David Collins, General Manager of Mega Communication on 04/25/03
is charge Charles District Court of violation of Ch 268, S4; Ch 268, S5
and Ch 265, S37 made false statement in court affidavit to prejudice
court hearing and protect Mega; false statement under oath to prejudice
a superior court hearing and using false statements to stop peaceful
protest and picketing the company.

11) Kate Gaffeney, Human Resources Director charged with perjury,
making false statement in sworn affidavit to protect company from
picketing, violating Ch 268 S 4. in Charlestown District Court.

MEGA IS UNTRUSTED AND DECEIVING COMPANY

Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.