When HR Silenced Oversight - and the President Let it Stand

Let's rewind to just before my formal legal demand.

On May 9th, I reached out with what should have been a routine clarification. I was on approved FMLA leave and asked whether using PTO during that time was optional or mandatory. I made it clear I was requesting this information in writing because my direct supervisor had insisted PTO was not optional, and I no longer felt safe relying solely on her interpretation. My request was respectful, specific, and copied to HR and Compliance for transparency. 

What happened next revealed everything.

The HR Director, the very person later named in my formal complaint - responded by removing both Compliance and the HR Department from the thread, stating that "Compliance should not be involved in employee-related concerns or personal health matters." She then directed all future communication regarding the matter exclusively to herself.

In other words, I had just asked for clarity, named my concerns, and the Director of HR responded by cutting out the departments meant to provide oversight. 

Silencing Oversight wasn't a side effect- it was the directive.

And later when I submitted my formal FMLA interference complaint, it was this very act- removing Compliance and asserting sole control over the conversation - that I asked to be investigated. 

But here's what makes it worse. When I escalated to the president of the company, his response was not to correct the breakdown in oversight. It was to refer me back to the HR Director. 

The president didn't fix it. He confirmed it.

This is how accountability gets buried.

--K