This complaint was filed with the board of the Franciscan Lodge in 2009, and was intended to support a female caretaker whom lost her job for reporting an instance of severe physical abuse. I prepared the complaint upon request of our North Tahoe LULAC Council.

1. Dear Franciscan Owners Association,
The League of United Latin American Citizens, the largest and
oldest Hispanic membership organization in the country,
advances the economic conditions, educational attainment,
political influence, health, housing and civil rights of Hispanic
Americans through community-based programs operating at
more than 700 LULAC councils nationwide.
As the North Lake Tahoe LULAC Council, we would like to file an
administrative complaint intended to express our serious concern for the well
being of the staff of the Franciscan Lodge. It has been brought to our attention
that employee safety within the Franciscan work environment has been
compromised, creating a 'hostile environment' in the workplace.
While understanding that Mr. Jeremy Gorup did eventually take action on a
harassment matter, we are concerned that supervisorial abuse was allowed to
continue for an extended amount of time until the Sheriff's Department
eventually became involved. A copy of the police complaint is attached to this
letter. Due to delayed investigations of employee complaints, the management
of the Franciscan Lodge was seen as complacent. Complacency will typically
cause harassment at the work place to occur more frequently.
Government Code 12490 allows an employee the privilege of a harassment free
workplace. "Harassment of an employee, an applicant, or a person providing
services pursuant to a contract by an employee, other than an agent or supervisor,
shall be unlawful if the entity, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have
known of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective
action." [12690 (j)(1)]
We are also concerned with the termination of an employee who brought the
workplace harassment complaint to the attention of management. Under State
and Federal law, it is illegal to retaliate against an employee who is reporting
harassment at the workplace, and such actions only add to a the fear that already
exists for the staff working within a hostile environment.
We encourage the investigation of this complaint by an objective and outside
investigator. Additionally, creating employer policy that deals with harassment
issues can help the Franciscan Lodge to set clear and strong guidelines that will
lead to the prevention of future employee harassment. A show of corrective
action could create a safer work place for years to come. Please consider adding
the attached document to your regulations and policies.
Sincerely, Jerry Joseph Dinzes
President of the North Lake Tahoe LULAC Council #3162

2. Franciscan Lodge - Good Employer Agreement
It is the policy and general practice of the Franciscan Owners' Association that:
1. Employees who, in good faith, complain about harassment in the
workplace should not be penalized for complaining.
2. Employees who harass others in the workplace should not be rewarded
for their misconduct.
3. Remedies for harassment in the workplace should be effective and serve
as a deterrent to future acts of misconduct.
The reasonable steps required by Section 12940(j) of the
Government Code to prevent workplace harassment from occurring shall
include but not be limited to the following:
In determining whether supervisorial employees have taken all reasonable steps
to prevent harassment from occurring, the following shall be considered:
1. Whether management personnel acted in good faith in making
employment-related decisions.
2. Whether management employees undertook an investigation that was
reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances.
3. Whether, after the investigation and prior to taking corrective action,
managers had a good faith, reasonable belief that an employee
engaged in misconduct and took corrective action based on
reasonable conclusions supported by substantial evidence that was
not trivial, arbitrary, capricious, or pretextual.
4. Whether the corrective action taken by management was reasonable
under the circumstances, including a consideration of the following
issues:
i. Whether actual discipline was imposed on the perpetrator of
harassment, and not merely a change in the perpetrator's
duties or working hours.
ii. Whether, if the supervisor changed the victim's duties or working
hours, the change was satisfactory to, and did not cause
annoyance or hardship to, the victim.
iii. Whether, if the supervisor changed the duties or working hours of
the perpetrator, the change was, in fact, corrective action that
the perpetrator did not welcome.
iv. Whether the corrective action was reasonable in light of any past
misconduct.
v. Whether any prior corrective action had been ineffective in
deterring the current misconduct.
5. The provisions of Section 4 shall not be construed to prohibit, prevent, or
interfere with a supervisor’s decision to take interimmeasures,
pending the outcome of an investigation conducted with all deliberate
speed, in order to separate the person alleging harassment from the
alleged perpetrator of harassment.