You’ve read about how a Preferred Employers Insurance Company employee, Chrysti Corkill, was granted intermittent leave to care for her seriously ill sister, which was wrongly counted as FMLA leave.

You’ve read how Chrysti, after she started taking that leave, was retaliated against by having her desk moved and placed under extra scrutiny, and continually harassed by a supervisor who kept trying to find fault with her performance.

You’ve read how Chrysti eventually took a bona fide FMLA leave for her own medical condition, which was personally approved by the Assistant Vice President of Human Resources, Daryl Tilghman, who would later deny he had any knowledge of her disability.

You’ve read how Chrysti was fired for not returning to work, even though she still had FMLA time left, and how Preferred Employers Insurance Company made no effort to accommodate her in any way.

But as bad as things were, everything was still “in-house.” Everything was still PEIC’s dirty little secret.

But all that was about to change…

* * * * * * *

It was now early July 2010. Chrysti Corkill had been gone nearly three months, having been officially terminated on April 12, 2010.

I was working at my desk when Daryl Tilghman came to me with a letter from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH).

The DFEH is California’s civil rights agency. It is the largest civil rights agency among all 50 states, and it investigates and prosecutes violations under various state laws, including the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Disabled Persons Act, Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Ralph Civil Rights Act.

Daryl told me he had just received the letter and that Chrysti Corkill was suing him and Rosemary Favier, as well as PEIC. He was very nervous. He handed me the letter to read. After reading the letter I told him I didn’t see stated anywhere in the letter that he and Rosemary Favier were personally being sued. He looked relieved when I told him this and he took the letter and went back to his office.

After receiving this notice, Daryl Tilghman began working on a draft of the official response. He had 30 days to respond, and he showed me a couple of the drafts. The drafts contained statements that were not true.

For example, he had written, “The first we became aware of complainant’s disability was upon receipt of the complaint from the Department of Fair Employment & Housing, dated 6/28/2010.”

This was nonsense. Daryl Tilghman was well aware Chrysti Corkill had applied for FMLA for her own medical condition back in February 2010. He had personally approved it. He’d seen her doctor’s notes stating she was unable to work, the very definition of disability. He even had me digging into her disability claim with The Standard Insurance Company the day Chrysti was fired.

He had also written that, “Chrysti Corkill was granted 12 weeks of leave as per FMLA standards.”

Again, this was untrue. Daryl knew, as well as I, that the first part of Chrysti’s leave to care for her sister did not meet FMLA standards. He knew that on the day Chrysti Corkill was terminated she technically still had 191 hours of FMLA leave available to her.

Daryl had also tried to work around the ADA accommodation regulation by claiming PEIC was facing an undue hardship with Chrysti’s leave, and therefore couldn’t give her more time.

He wrote that Chrysti Corkill’s job was “a specialized position, requiring a high level of technical expertise, which currently has no designated backup with the required skill set to perform the duties of the complainant’s position. During the complainant’s leave of absence, the complainant’s supervisor, along with other staff are covering the ‘basic’ functions of the desk. This in itself represents a hardship to existing staff. Because of the highly specialized nature of this position, it has been difficult to find an acceptable replacement. Recruitment efforts are currently in progress.”

The problem with this statement was that I hadn’t seen any recruitment efforts to replace Chrysti. I was usually aware of any job openings. I was the one who posted all the job postings on Monster.com, or Jobing.com, or other similar job boards, and I was the one who received the resumes, directly to my email inbox. In fact, when Daryl had sent Linda Smith a staffing update on June 28, 2010, there was no mention of replacing Chrysti’s position. There was no sense of urgency, that I was aware of, to find a replacement for Chrysti.

In fact, Chrysti’s job wasn’t filled until November 1, 2010; almost 7 months after she was terminated.

About the only thing true in Daryl’s draft response was when he stated Chrysti Corkill was not fired for performance issues. Despite Rosemary Favier’s efforts to find fault with Chrysti’s work, nothing was ever documented to show any problems. No write-ups were in her file, no documentation about any issues, nothing.

After reading what Daryl Tilghman intended to say to the DFEH, I told him I wanted no part of it, and that I wouldn’t go along with it. He said that it didn’t matter; the attorneys would take care of it.

This was the beginning of the end of my career at Preferred Employers Insurance Company…only I didn’t know it yet.

Next: Part 8 – The plot thickens

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 6: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 5: PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 4: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 3: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Dear Readers…

The week before Chrysti was due back to work, I received an email from Chrysti stating “Due to unforeseen circumstances in my sister’s recovery, my doctor cannot release me back to work full time and has extended my leave until 6/15/10. You should be receiving updated documentation from his office shortly for my personnel file.” I forwarded this email to Daryl Tilghman.

Shortly afterwards, Daryl Tilghman received a faxed note from Chrysti’s doctor stating, “Due to medical necessity Chrysti Corkill will be unable to work through June 15th, 2010.”

I went to Daryl Tilghman’s office to speak with him about Chrysti Corkill’s request for extended leave time. I asked him how we would accommodate her.

Daryl Tilghman said he had to discuss it with Linda Smith. Then he asked me again about Chrysti Corkill’s FMLA hours. I told him that her FMLA leave, as we had calculated it, ran out on Friday, April 9, 2010, but technically she had more FMLA hours because her first 191 hours really shouldn’t have been applied to her FMLA leave time.

I also reminded him she was on disability, though, and that could make a difference as far as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under the ADA, PEIC could be required to accommodate a disabled employee and engage in the interactive process to determine how we could accommodate. This irritated him when I brought up these matters, so I let it drop.

The morning of Friday, April 9, 2010, Daryl Tilghman had a meeting with Linda Smith and Rosemary Favier. After the meeting, Daryl Tilghman called me into his office and told me that Linda Smith and Rosemary Favier wanted to terminate Chrysti Corkill. Daryl Tilghman told me Linda Smith told him to contact Chrysti that morning. Daryl Tilghman asked me again if I was absolutely sure that Chrysti Corkill’s leave was used up. I told him that her leave time ran through April 9, 2010, and that Chrysti Corkill should be back at work by Monday, April 12, 2010.

Daryl was plainly worried about what I had told him about the ADA, and he had me check on the status of Chrysti’s Short Term Disability claim with The Standard Insurance Company. I did so, and forwarded the emails from The Standard to Daryl. The emails indicated that Chrysti’s claim was still in progress.

In the meantime, Daryl Tilghman then called Chrysti Corkill’s home phone and cell phone and left messages for her to call him.

Before Chrysti called back, Daryl Tilghman began drafting her termination letter.

Chrysti Corkill called Daryl Tilghman and he took the call on his office phone. Daryl came to my office and told me to come to his office as he had Chrysti Corkill on the phone. He wanted me to listen and be a witness to the conversation. I went to his office and Daryl Tilghman put Chrysti on speaker phone. Daryl Tilghman told Chrysti I was in his office listening to the conversation, but he had told me not to speak. I made handwritten notes of the conversation.

Daryl Tilghman told Chrysti Corkill that he had received her doctor’s note stating her need for additional leave through June 15, 2010. He told Chrysti Corkill that he could not extend her leave or give her additional time off. If she did not return to work in a full-time capacity on Monday, April12, 2010, she would be terminated.

Chrysti Corkill then said she could work part-time and Daryl Tilghman told her that PEIC didn’t have part-time employees. Daryl Tilghman also said her doctor’s note didn’t state she could work part-time.

Chrysti replied that the Return to Work paperwork she had received from PEIC, and which she gave to her doctor to complete, stated she had to return to work in a full-time capacity with no restrictions. Her doctor was given no other option on the form to consider- it was either 100% full-time or nothing, so therefore he never put anything about part-time

Chrysti was correct on this. PEIC officially maintained a 100% Return to Work policy, with no restrictions allowed. This meant that the only ADA accommodation PEIC could give would be to extend an employee’s leave. However, in fact, other accommodations had been made in the past for employees, including part-time work. But in Chrysti’s case, PEIC was not going to allow her extended time, based on her disability, and PEIC was summarily refusing her request to work part-time.

Daryl had demanded that I write “Chrysti must be returned to full duty with no restrictions” on Chrysti’s Return to Work note, just to emphasize the point. The “Full Duty” box was pre-checked before sending to Chrysti, so when she gave it to her doctor the doctor had no other options.

Daryl Tilghman again stated that if Chrysti Corkill didn’t return to work, full-time on Monday, April 12, 2010, she would be terminated. Chrysti Corkill said she wished she had been offered more consideration. Daryl Tilghman then told Chrysti Corkill PEIC would send out the termination paperwork, along with COBRA paperwork, on Monday.

After this conversation, Daryl asked me to re-write my notes from my work notebook, summarizing the conversation with Chrysti, for her file. However, he told me to leave out any reference of Chrysti Corkill’s offer to work part-time. I did as he told me to do.

Chrysti Corkill was officially terminated with a letter dated April 12, 2010, stating that “Since you have not returned to work today, we must inform you that we can no longer continue to hold your position open.” This letter was drafted on April 9, 2010, and sent to me to review.

Wednesday: Part 7 – The DFEH investigation

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 7: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study in a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 5: PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 4: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 3: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Dear Readers…

They sent a letter designed to shut me up. It was a blatant effort to mischaracterize the facts and try to intimidate me, Chrysti Corkill, and our lawyer, Josh Gruenberg.

I didn’t publish their letter then, but I will publish it now.

And here is our response.

Since beginning my series, PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong, my blog has received thousands of hits.

Interest is high, and why wouldn’t it be? It’s a story of what actually occurred, backed up by the documents and audio recordings. How often do you get to hear the Assistant Vice President of Human Resources for a major corporation lie under oath?

This is as real as it gets, and for anyone involved in human resources it’s a fascinating look into the bloody guts of the machine.

I will continue to publish the story.

Kim Urban
kim (at) kimberlydurban.com

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 7: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study in a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 6: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 4: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 3: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Dear Readers…

I met with Daryl Tilghman, the AVP of Human Resources for Preferred Employers Insurance Company, and showed him the doctor’s note. I told him that we should just start fresh. Since Chrysti’s previous time off wasn’t valid under FMLA, I suggested we reset the clock at 0 hours; and let Chrysti start a bona fide FMLA leave and forget about trying to add in the previous time she’d taken off.

Daryl said no. I was to continue to count any time she’d previously taken as bona fide FMLA leave.

This left Chrysti with only 37 days of FMLA leave. She should have gotten 12 weeks (60 days) of FMLA. But because we were counting the previous time off to care for her sister as FMLA, she would only have until April 9, 2010.

She’d have to return to work on Monday, April 12, 2010.

Because this leave was for Chrysti’s own medical condition, I had to start a fresh set of paperwork. I sent to Chrysti the PEIC FMLA letter, a Notice of Eligibility and Rights and Responsibilities, a FMLA Application, a Medical Certification for her doctor to fill out, plus various pamphlets such as the CFRA pamphlet and a Short Term Disability Claims packet.

This is routine, but in Chrysti’s case Daryl Tilghman had me add to the PEIC FMLA letter, in bold type, “Once a completed and signed Medical Certification Form is received in the HR department and approved by the AVP of Human Resources, we will send you a letter approving your FMLA/CFRA leave. If additional information is required to approve the leave, we will notify you.”

Chrysti received the PEIC FMLA letter and the Notice of Eligibility, filled out the FMLA/CFRA Application, and had her doctor fill out the Medical Certification.

Once she returned them to me I went to Daryl Tilghman so he could personally approve Chrysti’s FMLA leave.

He did so, but before I sent Chrysti the approval he first directed me to change the form a bit by lining out the words, “including a workers’ compensation injury” and then hand-write “not a worker’s comp claim,” and initial and date it.

I did so, and then I fedex’ed the approval to Chrysti, so she’d know that her FMLA/CFRA leave for her own medical condition had been officially approved.

So we were set: Her doctor’s note and all the required forms were in her file. The leave had been personally approved by Daryl Tilghman. As of February 18, 2010, Chrysti Corkill was on FMLA for her own medical condition.

Several months later, however, in an astonishing turn of events, Daryl Tilghman was called upon to testify under oath about what he knew about Chrysti’s leave. I wasn’t present.

But I have the audio recording.

Next week: – The termination of Chrysti Corkill

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 7: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study in a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 6: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 5: PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 3: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Dear Readers…

I wasn’t aware of any issues until just before Christmas, when Linda Smith, CEO of Preferred Employers Insurance Company at that time, came around several times asking me specifically about Chrysti’s leave.

I had no idea at the time why Linda was questioning me, but later, after I was terminated and I contacted Chrysti Corkill, Chrysti filled me in on what had happened:

Linda Smith, former CEO of Preferred Employers Insurance Company

In Chrysti’s words:

Rosemary Favier was on vacation that week and Priscilla Fitch, Claims Manager, had executive authority for claims issues at that time. I came in at my pre-approved time of 10:00 a.m. and Latifah Davis, Medical Unit Manager, motioned me over to her desk. Latifah Davis indicated that Priscilla Fitch had been inquiring about my whereabouts and was going through items on my desk. As soon as I sat down at my desk, Priscilla Fitch appeared at my desk and confronted me and sternly inquired as to where I had been. I stated that I had been attending to a personal matter. She was very adamant about knowing where I was because Linda Smith had been asking her. Priscilla Fitch then demanded to know where I was and I stated that Rosemary Favier and HR were aware of my schedule. When I would not provide specifics, she stormed off and left my cubicle.-Chrysti Corkill

Now it made sense. I had seen Priscilla in Daryl Tilghman’s office that week, and Daryl later told me that she was complaining about Chrysti.

At the end of that week Chrysti went on vacation and returned on January 5, 2010. By then, Priscilla had also complained to Rosemary Favier. Chrysti returned to find her desk moved and an angry Rosemary.

In Chrysti’s words:

I returned from vacation and discovered my desk had been moved to an open area outside Linda Smith’s office. This location had been vacant four years and was in a high traffic area. This posed a problem as my job entailed the handling of highly confidential physician documents, which contained personal and professional information. Since I had just returned from vacation, my first task was to review my email for any issues I needed to address.

At this point Daryl Tilghman stated the company had the right to request recertification, which was his only input into the conversation. I requested the paperwork needed to recertify my leave and was told it would be provided to me. I was asked if I had any additional questions, I replied “no” as I was shocked by the tone and discussion of the meeting and was at a loss for words. I left the conference room and was asked to close the door behind me.- Chrysti Corkill

Latifah Davis, Medical Unit Manager for PEIC

I was not present at this meeting, but immediately after the meeting Rosemary Favier came to my office and asked me to get with Chrysti to recertify her leave.

This posed a number of problems. First, Rosemary had no business demanding a recertification. This was a human resources issue and she wasn’t allowed to see confidential medical records of employees.

Second, Chrysti was correct: her initial certification was good through April, 2010.

Unless Rosemary had specific information that indicated Chrysti was indeed “abusing the system,” no recertification could be demanded. I had seen no evidence of any abuse. Priscilla had never come to me about this issue, and Daryl had never discussed it with me.

But the overriding problem was this: Chrysti’s FMLA leave didn’t meet FMLA standards. I’d told Daryl that from the beginning. In effect, I was being asked to “recertify” a leave that wasn’t valid in the first place. It made no sense. I emailed Daryl for clarification on Rosemary’s recertification request and received a confused and strange reply.

I then went to his office to get verbal clarification and he seemed puzzled about it all, but still, he said I had to do it. Then he called Rosemary into his office and confirmed to her that it would be done.

The next day, Chrysti emailed me about getting the forms, and Rosemary also emailed me to make sure I followed through.

So once again, I gave Chrysti the paperwork and she had her sister’s doctor fill it all out again, just as before, making sure Chrysti was designated as the “primary care giver” for her sister.

But the atmosphere surrounding Chrysti had become negative. It was obvious to me something was going on, and I confronted Daryl about it.

He admitted to me that “Linda and Rosemary wanted Chrysti gone,” and that Rosemary was now trying to find “performance issues” with Chrysti. He said that Chrysti’s desk had indeed been moved so she could be watched by Rosemary and Linda.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. PEIC had given Chrysti leave and now PEIC was beating her up for using it. As far as Chrysti’s performance, I’d never seen any documentation that Chrysti was doing a poor job. Nothing was in her file. In fact, judging from the bonuses she had received, and her last performance review, one could only conclude she was doing a good job.

Rosemary Favier never presented the human resources department with any documentation that Chrysti Corkill was not performing her job.

Finally, on February 17, 2010, Chrysti, looking tired and drawn out, came to me with a note from her doctor and requested medical leave for herself.

Tomorrow: Part 4 – The shocking audio recording you have to hear.

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 7: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study in a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 6: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 5: PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 4: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Dear Readers…

Nothing could be further from the truth. My blog is an attempt to finally reveal what happened at PEIC, to reveal the facts as I know them, and to tell the truth.

PEIC, on the other hand, seems to have gone to great lengths to hide the facts and to keep its employees in the dark.

It is not my wish to intimidate any present or former employee of PEIC from coming forward and speaking out. In fact, I welcome it. All anybody can ask of you is to tell the truth. You have that right, either by contacting your managers, the human resources department, or anybody else at PEIC.

If that won’t work for you, then feel free to contact me. Nobody should ever feel restrained from speaking the truth.

Kim Urban
kim (at) kimberlydurban.com

Possibly Related Posts:

• Part 7: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study in a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 6: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 5: PEIC – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 4: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong
• Part 3: Preferred Employers Insurance Company – A Case Study of a Corporation Gone Wrong