Pro se litigant has decided to put the facts out in public domain via a website. The site http://www.CiViL1.org will contain some information pertaining to her federal court case and California Senate Bill No. 921.
Fresno, California (PRWEB) July 06, 2013 Launched by Janetra Johnson, M.B.A., CiViL1, http://www.CiViL1.org is a website dedicated to her court case and will serve to save some history behind California Senate Bill No. 921 (CA Senate Bill No. 921). The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Johnson v. Departments of the Army and Air Force; et al., case No. 10-16450 (06 January 2012), decided in its unpublished federal opinion to not mention any events or facts in the case. According to Nonpubilcation.com, “Known as memorandum dispositions, unpublished federal opinions are often terse announcements of the outcome of a case not intended to set a precedent. They make up almost 90 percent of the court’s annual output. In the first nine months of 2009, the 9th Circuit published 665 precedential opinions and issued 4,844 memorandum dispositions. Memorandum dispositions, by contrast, are often written by law clerks and seldom discuss the facts of a case. ‘A memorandum disposition is a letter to the parties.’”
CiViL1.org has information about CA Senate Bill No. 921 on its website. This California law became effective 01 January 2013, and was established in response to recent media investigations exposing financial and management misconduct involving the past adjutant generals of the California National Guard (CNG). “It …provides that in addition to all other causes of action, penalties, or other remedies provided by law, any state officer or employee who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or coercion against an employee for having disclosed a complaint or allegation shall be liable in an action for damages brought against him or her by the injured party.”
The National Guards State Performance Appraisal Program: Janetra Johnson filed her federal complaint in the district court in February 2009, case No. 1:09-cv-00281-LJO-DLB; before CA Senate Bill No. 921 was enacted into law. According to the appeal, for case No. 10-16450, Johnson, pro se, was a Technician employed by the 144th Fighter Wing; a unit within the California Air National Guard (CANG) for approximately 12 years. Johnson challenged the National Guards State Performance Appraisal Program for its technicians. The Plaintiff argued, in accordance with, DoDI 1400.25 V430, “DoD Civilian Personnel Management System: Performance Management”, the Department of Defense (DoD) had regulated the performance management process when it required on 25 July 1997; performance appraisal programs established or revised after its effective date to specify one, and only one, Summary Level pattern. Johnson said Supervisors and Managers at her unit, the 144th Fighter Wing, were being paid for their EEO/AEP compliance and achievements as part of their overall performance and had done nothing. The Plaintiff believed the past adjutant generals of the California National Guard and senior officials at her unit were abusing, neglecting or mismanaging the compensation and compliant process. In the decade Johnson was employed at her unit; women of color—African-Americans, Asian-Americans and Latinas—could not keep pace with Caucasian women or men. The unit reverted to its “old-boy network” practice of nepotism, fraternization, cronyism and favoritism to fill senior-level positions; and those practices had an adverse affect or impact on the Plaintiff.
Before California Senate Bill No. 921 took effect on 01 January 2013, the California National Guard changed precedent to include more minorities and women in the higher ranks of the departments and it continued to embark upon an ongoing compliance effort to meet the provisions of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
1. On 01 August 2009, the California Military Department established CNGFPR 931, “Reasonable Accommodation for Individuals with Disabilities” policy.
2. On 05 November 2009, NGB revised the NGTPR 430, “National Guard Technician Performance Appraisal” policy, and it eliminated the State Performance Appraisal Program. That revision prescribed one performance management program for all dual-status and non-dual status National Guard Technicians employed under the provisions of 32 U.S.C. 709. That revision also prescribed the use of the five-rating level evaluation method for the National Guard Performance Appraisal Program.
3. On 02 February 2010, Brig. Gen. Mary J. Kight became the first African-American woman to serve as adjutant general in the United States.
4. On 08 February 2011, NGB changed the Technician Assistance Program to bring it in line with the Federal Government Employee Assistance Program (EAP).” it established responsibilities, policies and procedures for the Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Program for National Guard technicians. Title 5 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), part 792 (Federal Employee’s Health and Counseling Program)…” It was established to provide “The Adjutants General’ (TAG) regulatory guidance to practice “the Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Program at the State level.” That publication superseded TPS 792-2, dated 5 September 1978.
5. In September 2012, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) published a survey, “Making the California National Guard more diverse”, that showed the CANG increased its minority and female officers in senior leadership positions in the department by 133%; that proves, the CANG’s standardless and largely subjective hiring and retention rules were in fact, biased with respect to race and gender.
6. On 20 March 2013, the Petty report, which was exposed by the NBC Bay Area-KNBC joint investigation. “This report identified failures in the way Guard handled reports of sexual harassment, racism and retaliation. The Petty report criticized the CNG’s failure to meet the National Guard standards in handling complaints by Guard members. A representative from the NGB said that it recently provided additional training and that the CNG is now in compliance.”
Spoliation of Electronic Information: According to the complaint, there were three significant revisions to the National Guard Technician Appraisal policy; before the state of California enacted Senate Bill No. 921 into law. The first revision was on 01 October 1997; the second revision on 15 June 2005 and the third revision on 05 November 2009. Today, it seems there were only two revisions to the National Guard Technician Appraisal Program; the first revision on 01 October 1997, the second revision on 05 November 2009; this is inaccurate and misleading because most regulations are published and superseded chronologically by date of issuance. Its 2009 performance appraisal policy revision should have superseded its 2005 policy on the same subject matter, since it is no longer the most recent version.
About CiViL1.org: CiViL1.org serves to save some history behind CA Senate Bill 921. To get more information visit http://www.CiViL1.org or find us on Twitter, YouTube, and Google+. This website will be updated from time to time. CiViL1.org is not affiliated with any attorney, group, or organization; this includes California legislature or military departments. CiViL1.org has the greatest respect for the law, the judiciary and the legal process. CiViL1.org encourages all those interested in knowing about the case, particularly the events leading up to CA Senate Bill No. 921, verify the statements made in Court documents and on the website.
559.402.0011 (Google Voice)
District Court: No. 1:09-cv-00281-LJO-DLB
Appellate Court: No. 10-16450
>> some court files online: https://civil1.org/court-files/
California Legislative Information
1998, The Sacramento Bee & The Post and Courier
2001, USA TODAY
2006, California State Auditors
2009, District Court Decision
2010, The Sacramento Bee
2012, Ninth Circuit Court Decision
2013, NBC Bay Area and KNBC in Los Angeles