[00:00:36] Speaker 02:
and did not portray accurately the facts.

[00:01:05] Speaker 03:
Also, I'd like to begin by asking you which actions by the

[00:01:37] Speaker 02:
I will go through and do it.

[00:02:14] Speaker 02:
Every time it mentioned the leave within the brief presented by the district, they always said a paid administrative leave.

[00:02:26] Speaker 02:
That was not an issue with my client.

[00:02:29] Speaker 02:
She had a stellar reputation and had had one since approximately 19 years.

[00:02:37] Speaker 02:
And so for her to be involuntarily

[00:03:00] Speaker 02:
they kept her out for approximately a little more than three months and without explanation and at the end without even returning the phone calls.

[00:03:39] Speaker 02:
of restriction that she was given.

[00:04:08] Speaker 00:
between the series of adverse employment actions that you've listed and something having to do with union activity or advocating for disabled students.

[00:04:37] Speaker 02:
First of all, the main cause of action would have been the age discrimination because these supervisors had the reputation

[00:05:06] Speaker 02:
was hired to be Ms.

[00:05:09] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy's assistant.

[00:05:12] Speaker 02:
He was an assistant in the DE program, and by the way, too.

[00:05:42] Speaker 02:
Her evaluations were stellar, as stellar as they could be because Satisfactory was the highest.

[00:06:17] Speaker 02:
she was getting rid of Mike Hudson he was in the 60s and that she gave him the alternative either you resign retire are you going to be fired and so he decided to retire and that was the understand whatever may have happened to Mike Hudson I don't how is that

[00:06:46] Speaker 02:
was in, that was her assistant, and this was in the environment of the distance education program.

[00:06:56] Speaker 02:
And so she felt really embarrassed by that, but then Laura Hope started speaking to Ms.

[00:07:08] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy, along with the other people, Hardy, Serrano,

[00:07:28] Speaker 02:
That's exactly what they did.

[00:07:31] Speaker 02:
They took R.C.

[00:07:34] Speaker 02:
and had Ms.

[00:07:35] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy to train her to be the assistant to her.

[00:07:41] Speaker 02:
And then they decided that Ms.

[00:07:44] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy would have to go.

[00:07:46] Speaker 02:
And so Ms.

[00:07:47] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy would have to go.

[00:08:10] Speaker 02:
the district was allowing Ms.

[00:08:15] Speaker 02:
Hardy and Ms.

[00:08:17] Speaker 02:
Hope to take away the work of Ms.

[00:08:22] Speaker 02:
Noseworthy, to take away that which she saw as her enjoyment in working in life because she had been responsible for this program from a total of what

[00:08:54] Speaker 02:
It was also a long time before Laura Hope became assistant superintendent and vice president.

[00:09:01] Speaker 03:
It was the information you were talking about with Mike Hudson and his treatment by the same defendants.

[00:09:09] Speaker 03:
Is the only evidence of that in Ms.

[00:09:12] Speaker 03:
Noseworthy's declaration?

[00:09:15] Speaker 03:
I'm sorry, can I just say is that the information you you were asked about what evidence

[00:09:22] Speaker 03:
a conclusion that there was a cause or connection between the adverse actions in one of the bases for discrimination, age, or union involvement.

[00:09:32] Speaker 03:
And you talked about the way that Mike Hudson was treated.

[00:09:36] Speaker 03:
My recollection from reading the brief is that the evidence about how Mike Hudson was treated is only found in Ms.

[00:09:45] Speaker 03:
Nosworthy's declaration.

[00:09:47] Speaker 03:
She says that Hope told her that Hudson was discriminated against

[00:09:54] Speaker 03:
older people.

[00:09:55] Speaker 03:
I just want to make sure that I'm right that the evidence regarding Mike Hudson is only found in Ms.

[00:10:01] Speaker 03:
Knowsworthy's declaration.

[00:10:04] Speaker 03:
Yes, but who else would know about it?

[00:10:08] Speaker 03:
Well, Mr. Hudson, because I thought that what the declaration says is that Ms.

[00:10:12] Speaker 03:
Hope told Mr. Hudson that the reason that he was being let go was

[00:11:48] Speaker 02:
not stop Brock from acting in any way that would have threatened her.

[00:12:16] Speaker 02:
and show the discrimination going on against...

[00:13:17] Speaker 00:
Wasn't the evaluation from Ms.

[00:13:20] Speaker 00:
Serrano also about the two-year period where she was put on administrative leave and other employees were talking about a hostile work environment?

[00:13:27] Speaker 00:
Didn't that figure into her evaluation?

[00:13:32] Speaker 02:
That's what Ms.

[00:13:32] Speaker 02:
Serrano said, but if you look at the contracts of the classified individuals,

[00:13:48] Speaker 02:
not to cause a discipline that's

[00:14:54] Speaker 02:
evaluation that could be used in order to get rid of her and didn't even tell her.

[00:15:02] Speaker 02:
Of course she knew because she was a representative for the CSEA, the union, but didn't tell her about it.

[00:15:10] Speaker 02:
She could always get it taken out.

[00:15:33] Speaker 01:
Good morning.

[00:15:33] Speaker 01:
David Urban for J.P.

[00:15:34] Speaker 01:
Community College District and the individual defendants.

[00:15:38] Speaker 01:
The court asked previously what the adverse employment actions are in this case.

[00:15:41] Speaker 01:
There are a lot of alleged issues with respect to misdemeanors for these employments.

[00:15:46] Speaker 01:
The only actual ones that even come close to being an adverse employment action are being placed on paid administrative leave.

[00:15:54] Speaker 01:
The letter of reprimand and the needs improvement rate

[00:16:07] Speaker 01:
under the FIA or First Amendment.

[00:16:11] Speaker 01:
For FIA, it asked to materially change the work circumstances, a letter of reprimand, a paid administrative leave.

[00:16:17] Speaker 01:
Arguably don't meet those criteria, same for needs improvement rating.

[00:16:21] Speaker 01:
I'm going to get to the best answer to that question quickly.

[00:16:41] Speaker 01:
We're calling Mr. Hudson.

[00:16:42] Speaker 01:
I think his name is Mr. Hoffman.

[00:17:17] Speaker 01:
anyone talk to her about persuading her to retire, but that her work conditions became so intolerable that it was age discrimination.

[00:17:26] Speaker 00:
Well, there was that one statement by Ms.

[00:17:29] Speaker 00:
Serrano about, I think about her age and are you going to retire soon?

[00:17:47] Speaker 01:
the record, and we submit that these two instances, one from early 2017 and that one conversation about retirement with someone who wasn't even her supervisor is just not enough to show age-based animus, nor is it enough to show harassment, and those are the only items in the record in which

[00:18:28] Speaker 01:
all those employees were nearby him and that's why she had that office with the other two employees.

[00:18:35] Speaker 00:
I think there was a comment in the record from Ms.

[00:18:37] Speaker 00:
Hope that said you're past the point of being able to have your own private office and so I've been looking to see if there's a basis

[00:19:36] Speaker 01:
uh, activities that could relate to union activities.

[00:19:40] Speaker 01:
Uh, but there's nothing, there's no interrelation or nexus between those two.

[00:19:44] Speaker 01:
I mean, they would have had to say, because your union said to do this, we're not going to do it, some things.

[00:19:48] Speaker 01:
And then a connection to her expression as part of her union-protected speech, that's not even necessarily her speech runners, references the union saying something about her office being available.

[00:19:59] Speaker 01:
Um, I think it might have been her declaration.

[00:20:02] Speaker 01:
I forgot where I read it, but.

[00:20:04] Speaker 01:
Okay.

[00:20:15] Speaker 01:
maybe some other office would be appropriate.

[00:20:17] Speaker 01:
And when I said it's not in the record, the reason for not having her own office, it is in the record because it was to be next to her supervisor, Matthew Moran.

[00:20:27] Speaker 01:
That's the reason for her remaining in that office with two other individuals in it.

[00:21:03] Speaker 01:
that other people swear in meetings, they say mean things in meetings, and they don't get written up, and that's what they've argued.

[00:21:08] Speaker 01:
Here it actually generated a complaint.

[00:21:11] Speaker 01:
An individual said, look, she shouldn't be talking to us like that.

[00:21:15] Speaker 01:
And then there was an email exchange between the plaintiff and the individual who said that, and they kind of, you know, they ended up friendly terms, but there was a complaint, and it did stand out.

[00:21:25] Speaker 01:
And this is also an individual who has been counseled about interaction with

[00:21:38] Speaker 01:
That's why it showed up and hurt.

[00:22:21] Speaker 01:
Yeah, it's um...

[00:22:59] Speaker 01:
have any other questions.

[00:23:40] Speaker 02:
maintain them.

[00:24:53] Speaker 02:
And it should be noted that her supervisor, Moran, agreed that what she had done had been

[00:25:32] Speaker 02:
that the faculty