November 16, 2009 - This is an update on the DOI perjury investigation of the NYCERS HR director, Felita Baksh (aka Ramsami). Listed below are letters between the NYCERS trustees and myself with respect to this investigation.
It is clear from the letters, that the trustees are ignoring this issue. I thought the November 3, 2009 election would have provided the trustees with a date for action. They are, however, still allowing this woman to put the agency at risk.
This year Baksh again lied under oath. NYCERS is currently trying to terminate a long time employee because she allegedly incorrectly claimed to have completed three cases on a weekly production report. This employee had previously reported the agency to DOI. That did not make the current executive director happy.
At a disciplinary hearing at OATH for this employee, Baksh lied about a conversation she had with the employee. Since it was a two person conversation, she felt free to deny saying what the employee claimed she had said. The employee, however, had the good sense to record the conversation unbeknownst to Baksh. There is now evidence of two instances of perjury by Baksh.
NYCERS had the nerve to threaten the employee with disciplinary charges for recording the conversation. You can’t make this stuff up. Of course, the NYCERS legal director, Mazza, was involved with the OATH hearing, so anything is possible. This was months ago and there is still no decision from OATH. That is not a good sign.
For the record, this savvy employee also has an EEO action against the agency which is moving into a trial stage. In light of my recommendation to the trustees to put Baksh on paid leave while the investigation is going on and their refusal to do so, it is disturbing that NYCERS felt it necessary to put this employee on paid leave for the last nine months along with a 30 day suspension without pay. Remember perjury is a criminal charge.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 12, 2009
Greg Floyd, President – Teamsters Local 237
Trustee, NYCERS Board of Trustees
216 West 14th Street
New York, NY 10011
Pub. Adv. Case #: 140753
Dear Trustee:
This is a follow up to a letter I sent to most of the trustees in March, 2009.
The original letter provided the trustees with evidence of perjury by the current NYCERS HR director, Felita Baksh.
Only one of the trustees, the Public Advocate, took any action with respect
to this evidence. The Public Advocate forwarded the charge to the Department of
Investigation (DOI) for its review and notified me of her action.
As of today, I have received no notice of any subsequent action in this case.
As reference, I am enclosing a copy of a May 9, 2009 letter that I sent to DOI
Concerning this matter. Please notify me of the status of this investigation.
In the interim, the trustees should immediately place the HR director on
administrative leave, since this is a criminal matter and the investigators already have clear evidence of the crime (an audio tape of DOI sworn testimony)
in their possession.
Sincerely yours,
John J. Murphy
Cc: Ms. Susan Edelman, NY Post
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER
GENERAL COUNSEL
1 CENTRE STREET. ROOM 614
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10007-2341
TELEPHONE: (212) 669-2048
FAX NUMBER: (212)815-8714
WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, JR.
OMPTROLLER
Lewis Finkelman
DEPUTY COMPTROLLER FOR LEGAL
AFFAIRS/GENERAL COUNSEL
August 19, 2009
John J. Murphy
Dear Mr. Murphy:
I write in response to the letter that you mailed to the
Comptroller on August 14ft and that was forwarded to me yesterday,
regarding your allegations of perjury by Felita Baksh, a current
employee of NYCERS. Your initial letter to the Comptroller in March
2009 regarding this matter was also referred to me and, at or about
that time, I promptly contacted the Department of Investigation ("DOI")
and forwarded your letter to that agency for its handling. Your most
recent correspondence makes clear that you have referred this matter to
DOI as well. Accordingly, you should follow up directly with DOI as to
the status of its investigation of this matter.
Very truly yours,
Lewis Finkelman
LF/lm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 23, 2009
Mr. Lewis Finkelman
Office of General Counsel
Office of the Comptroller
1 Centre Street, Rm. 614
New York, NY 10007
Pub. Adv. Case #: 140753
Dear Mr. Finkelman:
Thank you for your August 19, 2009 letter in which you acknowledge my March
20, 2009 letter to the Comptroller and notifying me that you had referred the reported perjury charge to DOI.
The Public Advocate had already promptly notified me in an April 29, 2009
letter that she had referred this work related perjury charge against the NYCERS HR director to DOI. The Public Advocate also sent me a copy of her
April 14, 2009 letter to Rose Gill Hearn.
The purpose of my August 12, 2009 letter to the NYCERS trustees was to find
out the status of that investigation.
It would appear from your August 19, 2009 letter that you also do not know the
status of that investigation.
DOI has never given me any acknowledgement of this matter in spite of my
Direct correspondence to Rose Gill Hearn or Richard Sullivan.
The Comptroller, as a NYCERS trustee, is employing this person as the
NYCERS HR director. This is while she is under investigation for perjury with
respect to her official duties at NYCERS. DOI has the audio tape on which she
intentionally lied under oath while being interviewed by DOI in 2004.
As a NYCERS fiduciary, the Comptroller should be protecting the fund from
this employee. He has hard evidence that this employee committed perjury.
I strongly recommended that the trustees place this employee on administrative
leave until the investigation is completed. I also request that you notify me
whether you adopt this recommendation and, if you don’t, why not.
DOI can not provide the trustees with protection from misdeeds by this
employee while she is under investigation. The fact that DOI is possibly complicit in the perjury charge makes this action more imperative.
In 1986, the trustees dealt with perjury in a rapid and ruthless manner. Why
Such a casual attitude now?
Sincerely yours,
John J. Murphy
Cc: Mr. Michael Barbaro, NY Times
No comments:
Post a Comment