WRONGFUL DISMISSAL
8
With all the lies, distortions and false accusations found in the dismissal letter, Lownsbrough's so called investigation was far from complete and certainly not thorough.
Note: 1/4/00
Legally Fisher became a regular employee on July 24/98 and could not be fired for general unsuitability click on FRAUDULENT LAYOFF
THANK YOU....YOUR VISIT IS APPRECIATED
pages  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20 
Below is proof that Principal Buckley actually wrote the letter
& Director Lownsbrough simply rubber stamped it!
Hear Buckley admit that "most of the content
of the dismissal letter was from her"
Principal Maeve Buckley Feb 24/99
... proof that Buckley wrote the
Feb 25/99 letter Lownsbrough claimed as
her own, which Buckley denies writing.... a draft
written by Buckley dated the day before Feb 24/99
( takes a few moments but worth the wait)
For all Correspondence related to SD #23''s wrongful dismissal of Fisher click Letters
Alan Akehurst sent Buckley a copy of Fisher's April 9/99 letter & Buckley made hand written comments along the borders.

When Fisher wrote, "In fact Lownsbrough allowed Buckley to write the Feb 25/99 letter firing me. Buckley admitted this at the meeting."

In denial, Buckley hand wrote in the border, "I never said that! I may have said that I provided information for Cathy. I said I wrote the info memo outlining the alarm investigation".

As usual Buckley is lying & confessed in a meeting that she supplied most of the content of the letter. Hear it in her own words below

To prove that Bukley wrote the letter we were able to locate a torn up draft written by Buckley..not much comes out of her mouth that is not distorted & slanted in this matter.
Buckley is caught in her lie.
Pieced together after being found... a torn up draft, written by Buckley, of the Feb 25/99 letter Lownsbrough signed as her own.
SD #23's Lownsbrough absurdly claimed that she had conducted a "complete and thorough investigation". When asked to provide copies of her investigation report, SD #23 claimed that there
was nothing in it's files related to any investigation !
Maeve Buckley
April 99
When asked to provide copies of her investigation report,
SD #23 replied that there was nothing in it's files related to any investigation !
8
SCHOOL DISTRICT #23 MALFEASANCE
Click on Play>>>>
In wrongfully dismissing Custodian Fisher, SD #23 was "malicious, high-handed, outrageous, reckless, wanton, entirely without care, intentional, deliberate, callous, disgraceful, willful, exploitative and in disregard of Fisher's rights and indifferent to the consequences.”
Duties in Time Segments
Reduced Area to Clean
Original Area to Clean
Contrary to Buckley & Lownsbrough's misinformation, Ken was honest & trustworthy and never left 1 hour & 45 minutes early as they claimed. Ken put in hundreds of hours without claiming overtime. Ken always cleaned the school thoroughly & completed his duties including dusting, table tops & toilets bowels. See Red Dots    above The above copies of duties to do lists attest to Ken's organized approach & dedication to his work.
In wrongfully dismissing Custodian Fisher, SD #23 was "malicious, high-handed, outrageous, reckless, wanton, entirely without care, intentional, deliberate, callous, disgraceful, willful, exploitative and in disregard of Fisher's rights and indifferent to the consequences.”
SD #23's claims against Fisher are groundless & fabricated. SD #23 colluded & conspired to discredit Fisher.
SD #23's claims against Fisher are groundless & fabricated.
SD #23 colluded & conspired to discredit Fisher.
SD #23's claims against Fisher are groundless & fabricated.
J. A. Dixon
J. A. Dixon
SD #23 colluded & conspired to discredit Fisher.
J. A. Dixon
Below is a copy of the Feb 25/99 dismissal letter which SD#23 Director of Instruction, Lownsbrough handed to Custodian Fisher. The letter has been broken down into 26 key points which fall into 7 groups listed on the next page 9.

While reading the Feb 25/99 dismissal letter, keep in mind that the signatory, Director of Instruction Lownsbrough had never met with & interviewed Custodian Fisher, yet she gives the false impression in the letter that she had both met & interviewed Fisher.

Despite excluding Custodian Fisher from her so called investigation prior to firing him, Lownsbrough absurdly claimed that she, "had conducted a complete and thorough investigation".
Principal Buckley who spearheaded getting Fisher fired after he had documented  Buckley compromising young student's safety, denies writing the dismissal letter that Lownsbrough claimed as one she wrote (click here to read the draft written by Buckley).

The many false accusations made in the letter by Lownsbrough/Buckley amount to slander and defamation of Fisher's character.

Lownsbrough erred by relying on Buckley's distortions & by failing to meet with Fisher.

SD #23 failed to investigate the circumstances in a complete and proper manner.

SD #23 often delayed, suppressed or prevented making available information in it's files.
A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada ( Wallace v United Grain Growers )
has allowed for an increase in the "normal" common law notice period where the employer has
acted unfairly at the time of termination.
Examples of such unfair treatment have included:
Making allegations of Just Cause where the there is no reasonable basis for doing so;
Failing to provide a letter of reference where the termination is without cause;
Failing to pay a sum which is due on termination under statute as a minimum entitlement.
SD #23 did not provide Fisher with an adequate opportunity to clear his name.
Fisher had no notice that he was being given an opportunity to ‘clear his name’ let alone notice of a hearing ‘conducted specifically for the stated purpose of allowing him to attempt to refute the charges against him ‘before the officials’ considering those
School District 23 even where the employee has not requested a hearing, should provide one where the charges are of a serious nature in order to avoid potential liability, especially in those jurisdictions that do
not require employees to affirmatively request name-clearing hearings.
Courts have ruled that an employee who is discharged amidst stigmatizing
charges of professional incompetence is entitled to a name-clearing hearing.
J. A. Dixon
SD #23 colluded & conspired to discredit Fisher.
**********
Compare the Draft Letter above with the Final Letter below to see that they are much the same, yet
according to Buckley's quote "I said I wrote the info memo outlining the alarm investigation"
The Draft Letter by Buckley is much more than just a memo outlining the alarm investigation as Buckley claims
Principal Maeve Buckley is caught in an outright lie & Cathy Lownsbrough participated in the lie.