I am a wrongfully terminated employee. I was terminated in violation of the first amendment of the United States Constitution. The pretext that was created to establish that I was insubordinate was created by lies. Those lies were maintained into Administrative Hearings and when they were repeated under Oath they became perjury, fraud on the court, and obstruction of justice.

The additional violations of the United States Constitution include the fifth, the ninth, and the 14th amendment; as well as other federal and state laws in support of the existing orders.

The Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC) the (USDC) and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (6th Cir) ignored the Post Hearing Brief that I wrote after I obtained the Hearing transcript. In the Post Hearing brief, Exhibit 2, District Court Record (DCR) 118, Page ID 4831 (to) 118-lPage ID 4924, I explained again the reasons the charges against the Union and the Employer stated a claim Under PERA. My insistence that the union represent me in scheduling a second date for the Loudermill hearing was both written and spoken; and was causally related to the decision to discharge me. See C/P #17; that is a case #19-5052 exhibit. C/P #17 is also seen as Exhibit 35, (DCR) 103-7 Page ID 2959 (to) 2963, and the copy I faxed to Long is seen as Exhibit 34, (DCR) 103-7 Page ID 2959 (to) 2963. The discharge decision was not only in retaliation for my insistence that the union be involved in scheduling a second day of the Loudermill hearing; but also to prevent me from having my witnesses heard, and to prevent me from exposing the overtime fraud, I believe was taking place in the department. If the Union had not conspired with the employer there would have been a post Loudermill hearing or an arbitration and I would not be here today. In either of those arena's I would have exposed the overtime fraud, and proven my innocence to the allegations of insubordination. In the post hearing brief I provided probative evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing. I exposed a plethora of material perjury that the AL J dismissed and ruled by an order titled "DECISION AND RECOMMENDED ORDER OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE" that contains many inaccurate statements, leading to the misconstrued and incorrect conclusions that have been carried forward; stating that there was no violation of the Unfair Labor Charge against the Employer; or, the Failure to Represent Charge against the Union. Establishing res judicata. See appendix case 19-5052, (12a).

Whether the termination of a public employee in retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights and the failure to provide due process in administrative hearings violate the U.S. Constitution