--00000000000011d73f05f3417d8c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Will do. On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 8:34 AM Charles Terlesky wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I've added you to a google document - the letter was initially was relate= d > to Michelle trying to work privately for our client. > > Please let me know if you need additional information from the document o= n > the timeline or on Michelle's work history. > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hs-u4Db5KEAtzuzqMVyc_r0e5qiuhqKTrW3sP= QVQ2yY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > > Regards, > Chuck > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 8:22 PM Charles Terlesky cterlesky@homecareassistance.com> wrote: > >> We will work on this tomorrow morning so you have all of the information >> you need. >> >> Thanks, >> Chuck >> >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 8:16 PM Steve Koyanagi >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks. I can respond to her directly, asking for her to provide any >>> legal authority that communications have to go through an attorney when= it >>> is a current employee. That is a rather ridiculous position in my view. >>> >>> Can you also please provide as many details as you can underlying the >>> written warning? Is it just related to the privatization issue? Can som= eone >>> put together a specific timeline of all events that were the reasons fo= r >>> the written warning? >>> >>> Those factual details will also help me with my email to her counsel. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 6:54 PM Charles Terlesky >> cterlesky@homecareassistance.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve: Here is the response from the lawyer. I just copied and >>>> pasted this here for you as to not accidently respond to the original = email. >>>> >>>> Let me know the next steps. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Chuck >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello Mr. Chuck Terlesky, >>>> >>>> >>>> You should understand that once a lawyer informs you that they have >>>> been retained, you are required to only communicate with the lawyer. Y= ou >>>> cannot communicate with that lawyer=E2=80=99s client. It does not matt= er that she >>>> is your employee or not. It is especially so when there are potential >>>> employment disputes with legal ramifications. >>>> >>>> >>>> In regards to potential employment disputes, you sent a letter to my >>>> client with specific allegations. She needs clarity regarding those >>>> allegations, and that is the substance of the letter we sent to you on >>>> January 23 2023. >>>> >>>> >>>> Added to the above, my client has never provided a letter of >>>> resignation. What has happened is that my client=E2=80=99s case manage= r wrote a >>>> letter threatening my client. >>>> >>>> >>>> My client does not understand the substance of that letter. Before she >>>> signs the letter or attends to any phone calls from you, she needs cla= rity >>>> regarding the threats in that letter. As you are well aware, there are >>>> financial consequences if it is established that she has breached her >>>> employment contract. >>>>