Hogan & Hartson Termination: February 1988

TO:  Miriam T. Chilton

FROM:  Gary Freedman

DATE: February 25, 1988

RE:  Termination Notice
__________________________________________

In view of the fact that you did not go into detail regarding your rationale for my termination, please permit me to respond to a few issues that may have been a part of your decision making, and, in so doing, perhaps clarify what may be a misunderstanding.

Monday, while proofreading, I noticed that one of the QC'ers [Daniel Cutler] was not using the standardized names when correcting mentioned names.  Purely as a joke, I noted to the QC'er that the reason he was failing to follow the standardized names was that he was attempting to generate overtime for himself since this same individual has been assigned the task of "cleaning up" the names field in OLIVE.

You may be aware of this incident and may have drawn certain inferences, namely that I was imputing to the QC'er my own motives, thereby revealing something of myself.  You may further have inferred that as a  a matter of course I displace aspects of myself onto other individuals.

In fact, I was imputing nothing to the QC'er.  First, the few instances of incorrectly QC'ed names were too few to generate any overtime.  But more important was what motivated my statement.  Back in 1986, while working on Mercedes, Espe had charged that I intentionally incorporated errors in my work in order to generate overtime, a charge that was amply refuted in a memo I gave to Sheryl Ferguson (a full copy of which you may have in your file, dated July 1986) (Sheryl concluded that Espe's accusation was false).  When, on Monday, I made the statement to the QC'er, I consciously had Espe's charge ringing in my ear, and as a sarcastic bit of humor I simply repeated what had been said of me back in May 1986 since it was an analogous situation.

In short, I was imputing nothing and revealing nothing of my "inner self."  I was simply making an attempt at humor based on a recollection.

Further, the charge of attempting to generate overtime is as false as it was in July 1986. It is simply one more case of a baseless accusation that seems to crop up now and again [See Attachment A], much like the accusation that I pick and choose batches to work on, which had been refuted each time it has been raised.

Once again, let me say, I work the way I do just because that's my nature.  I invite you to review the work I performed following the staff meeting on February 12.  If you review the batches of Full Pass QC and Pass II QC you will see that the work is done with the thoroughness typical of my efforts since commencing my assignment with the firm.  I'm not here for praise or acknowledgement and I don't work like a demon for some base motives.  I just take pleasure in a job well done, and, yes, I work to earn a living.

I respectfully request that you permit me to stay on and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you.  Also, Craig said yesterday that he would be willing to speak with you and noted to me that in his opinion my leaving would be a loss to the department.

If your decision remains firm, I wish to say it has been a pleasure to serve.

Thank you very much.

/s/

Gary