LJO JLT Document 252 35 Filed 06/03/10 Page 1 of 61

EXHIBIT 35

Case Document 252-35 Filed 06/03/10 Page 2 of 61

 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT or" CALIFORNIA

U.S. E.E.0.C.,

Case No. 
Plaintiff, LJO-BAK

vs.

ABM INDUSTRIES, INC., et al. 

Defendant.

 

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF RICHARD EUGENE STEINER
Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Bakersfield, California

Reported by:
Amy Meier
CSR No. 13248

JOB No. 118341

 

 

 

 

 

1111:

Case Page 3 of 61

15:

:15:
15:
15:
15:
15:
15:
15:
15:
16:
16:
16:
16:

:16:

16:

16

:16:

16:

16:

16:

:1608/18/09

25

 

 

MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation. Lacks
foundation.

A. I believe it was Jim Dremel, Brian Huckabee,
Tom Cazale.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. And that was before you were a district
manager; is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. And he became what relationship
did Javier have with you when you were district
representative? Were you co~equals on the work
chart?
MS. SAVITT: vague. Lacks foundation.
Calls for speculation.

A. Yeah, I -- I -- I guess so.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay.

A. We would have been different parts of the
org, so it would have been hard to say.

Q. Do you remember when Jose Vasquez was hired?

A. No.
Q. Okay. Do you remember Jose vasquez?
A. Yes.

Q. When you were a district manager, did you 

did you supervise Jose Vasquez?

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

11Case Page 4 0f 61

16:
16:
1'7:
1'7:

1'7:

1'7

1'7:

1'7:

1'7:

17:

17:

20:

:20:

:20:

:20:

:20:

:20:

:20:

:20:

20:

:20:

20:

:20:

:20:

:2108/18/09

26

 

 

 

 

A. Through Javier, yeah. He didn't directly
report to me.

Q. And do you remember when Jose Vasquez got
promoted?

A. Yes.

Q. And were you involved in that promotion?

A. Yes.
MR. MALLISON: Take a one-minute break. One
second, talk to 
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off record. The

time is 11:17 a.m.
(Recess taken.)

THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on record.
The time is 11:20 a.m.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. When you were district manager at ABM, did
you have the authority to hire peOple?
MS. SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous. Calls for
a conclusion.

A. I had the authority to recommend who was
hired.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay. Who would you recommend it to?

A. The branch manager would have the ultimate

say.

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

1111:

11:

Case Page 5 0f 61

36:
36:
36:
36:
3'7:

3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
3'7:
:37:
3'7:
:37:
3'7:
38:
38:
:38:
38:
:3808/18/09

42

 

 

A. Yes.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did Jose Vasquez have the authority, while
you were district manager, to re-assign tasks on the
fly as needed?

MS. SAVITT: vague and ambiguous.

Argumentative. Lacks foundation. Calls for a
conclusion and speculation.

A. Yes.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. So if someone failed to show up, for
instance, he could call somebody up in the middle of
the night to cover their tasks; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Did Jose Vasquez report to anybody other
than Javier or you?

A. No.

Q. You said you were not involved in the hiring
of Jose vasquez originally; is that correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. But you were involved in the promotion of
Jose Vasquez; is that correct?

MS. SAVITT: Asked and answered.
A. Yes.
MR. MALLISON:

Okay. Will you mark this as

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

1111:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

Case Page 6 0f 61

38:

38:
38:
38:
38:
39:
:39:
39:
:39:
39:
39:
39:
39:
39:
39:
:3908/18/09
43
Exhibit 1201.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1201 marked for identification.)
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. And we give -- she's going to give you that

one in a second.

MR. MALLISON: Does 1201 sound reasonable?
MS. HAYWARD: Sounds good, because we went
with the 700 series yesterday.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. You recognize this document?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell us what it is.

A. It's the promotion of Jose Vasquez or Joe
Vasquez.

Q. Okay. And did you write this document?

A. I believe it was a boilerplate, actually.

Just kind of fill in the blanks.

Q. Okay. Was it your decision to promote Joe
Vasquez?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And did you talk to anybody else
about the promotion prior to making this -- writing

this letter?

A. Yes.

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

1111:

Case Page 7 of 61

39:
:39:
:39:
40:
40:
:40:
:40:
40:
:40:

:40:

40

40:

:40:

40:

:40:

:40:

40:

:40:

40:

40:

:40:

:40:

40:

:40Who'd you talk to?
A. Tom Cazale and I believe Jim Dremel. Either
Jim Dremel or Faisal, depending who my manager was at
the time.
Q. Sorry. Got too many pieces of paper here.

Jim Dremel?
A. Yes.

And Faisal?

MS. SAVITT: Or.

A. Or Faisal.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. And do you remember what the conversation
entailed?

A. With who?

Q. Well --
MS. SAVITT: Since he doesn't remember who
it was with, I'm going to object. It calls for
speculation. But if he has some memory, he can
certainly tell you.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. You don't remember who you talked to.

Do you remember what the content of the

conversation was?

A. I could just say that I?m sure that I was,

you know, saying that I thought that he was a good

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

 

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

?11:

Case Page 11:42:08 25

 

 

 

candidate for a promotion.

Q. Okay. Did you talk to Javier Vasquez about
this?

A. Yes.

Q. What did Javier say?

A. Javier gave his input that he thought Joe
would be a good person to promote into the position.

Q. Okay. Did you know that Javier and Jose
were related at the time?

A. No.

Q. Did it strike you funny they had the same
last name?

A. In in that company there was a lot of
same last names.

Q. Okay. Did you actually conclude that he was
the best candidate for the job?

A. Yes.
MR. MALLISON: Okay. Mark this as 1201?
1202.

THE REPORTER: 2.
MS. SAVITT: 1202, right.

MR. MALLISON: 1202.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1202 marked for identification.)
need that back.

MR. MALLISON: Oh,

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

 

11Case Page 9 0f 61

42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
42:
:43:
43:
43:
43:
43:
43:
43:

:4308/18/09

46

 

 

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Do you recognize this document?

A. I've seen it before. Yeah.

Q. Okay. Did you fill it out?

A. No.

Q. Okay. Did you go over this checklist?
A. I -- I don't think so, actually.

Q. Okay. Do you know who did?

A. I would believe it would be Tom Cazale.

MS. SAVITT: Don't -- don't speculate.

THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did you provide any documents to Tom as part
of the promotion of Jose vasquez?

A. It would have just this letter of
promotion.

Q. Did -- if you'll notice towards the top --

A. Uh-huh.

9. 
"Application for Employment."

there's a -- very very top says

A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever review Jose Vasquez's
application for employment?

A. I don't think so.

Q. There's an entry, says "Resume."

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

11:

11:

11:

ll:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

Case DocumerHIg?-gg Page 08/18/09

 

 

A.

Did you ever see Jose Vasquez's resume?

well, I --
MS. SAVITT: What at the time.
No.

BY MR. MALLISON:

bit.

a question.



Okay. I take it you saw it later.
Yes.

In preparation for this deposition?

Yes.
Okay. we're going to come back to this in a
MS. SAVITT: Can I just get clarification of

You -- Mr. Steiner, he asked you if

you've ever seen this document before, and you said

yes.

I just want to clarify.

was it this exact document or was it just

the checklist form?

Vasquez?

THE WITNESS: I've seen the checklist, yes.

MS. SAVITT: Did you see the one for Jose
THE WITNESS: No.

MS. SAVITT: Because I think it was a little

bit vague.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q.

Okay. Do you know what this document is?

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES

877.955.3855

 

 

 

Case Documem?? Page 11 0f 61

08/18/11:

44:

44:

44:

44:

44:

44:

:44:

:44Yes. And that's what I was testifying

earlier is that, yes, I've seen this because I got

?one when I was promoted.

Q. Okay. You -- you've never seen the one for

Joe -- Jose vasquez?

A. No.
Q. Okay. And did -- have you reviewed it
since?

A. No.
Q. At that time?
A. No. I --

MS. SAVITT: Since what time? He never saw

it before.

A. Yeah. I -- I never saw it before.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. You've never seen it until this -- this is

the first time you've seen it?
A. Correct.
When

MS. SAVITT: I -- I just was curious.

you said "this document," I should have objected. It
was vague as to whether it was the form or the
filled-out document, so I wanted that clarified for
you.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. What -- what was the basis for you coming to

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

ll11:

11:

11:

11:

Case Page 12 0f 61

45:
45:
45:
45:
45:
45:
45:
45:
45:

:45:

46:

46:

46:
46:
46:
:4608/18/09

49

 

 

the conclusion that Jose Vasquez was suited for this
position?

A. we11, primarily it was the recommendation of
Javier. And then I also think that Joe talked to Jim
Dremel somewhere in there, and Jim had a lot more
experience as -- in janitorial, and he thought that
he would, you know, he a good candidate and gave that
information to me. And then I, in turn, recommended
him to Jim to approve, and so that's why he got
promoted.

THE REPORTER: Why "he" or got promoted?
THE WITNESS: 
MR. MALLISON: I'd like to mark this as

2003. No. 1203.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1203 marked for identification.)
MS. SAVITT: Thank you.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Do you recognize this document?
MS. SAVITT: Again, I'll have to object as
vague, if you're referring to the form or to the
actual filled-out document. I just think for
clarification --

MR. MALLISON: we'll start with both.



 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

11

11:

11:

11:

11

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

Case Docume?ig?g?e??g'sos?llg?g Page 13 of 61

:54:
54:
54:
55:
:55just one second.

THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off record. The
time is 11:53 a.m.

(Recess taken.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: we are back on record.
The time is 11:55 a.m.
MR. MALLISON: Mark this as 1204.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1204 marked for identification.)
MS. SAVITT: Thank you.
MR. MALLISON: You guys know -- remember the
previous number?
BY MR. MALLISON:
Do you recognize this document?
Yes.
Can you tell us what it is.

It's Jose vasquez's resume.



Okay. Did you take a look at this resume
while you were district manager?

A. No.

Q. Did you take a look at this while you were
district supervisor?
MS. SAVITT: He was never a district

supervisor.



 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

11Case Docume?ig?g?Ef?l?dEo?gf?? Page 14 0f 61

56:
56:
56:
56:
:56:
56:
56:
56:
56:
56:
57:
5'7:
:57:
5'7:


5'7:

5'7:
5'7:

:57

5'7

:51'7

:21

:21

:208/18/09

59

 

 

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. District representative. Excuse me.
A. No.

MS. SAVITT: Did you ever see it while you
were employed?

THE WITNESS: No. At ABM, no.

MR. MALLISON:
even I ask lots of

MS. SAVITT: See,

questions. So stipulated.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. So just to clarify, you didn't rely upon
this or use this for purposes of the promotion of
Jose Vasquez?

A. No.

I think it

MS. SAVITT: Is that correct?

was a double negative. was his statement correct?
MR. MALLISON: I'll clarify.
THE WITNESS: Yeah.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Did you rely upon this resume of Jose
Vasquez as part of your promotion of Jose Vasquez?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Did you check any of the references
on the resume even if you didn't look at the resume?
MS. SAVITT:

Lacks foundation. There's no

Thanks for the clarification.

 

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

1111:

11:

ll:

11:

11:

Case Page 15 of 61

57:
57:
57:
57:
5'7:
5'7:
5'7:

57:

57:

5'7:

5'7:
57:
57:
57:
57:
58:
:5808/18/09

60

 

references.
A. And no.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Did you call any of his previous employers,

Jose Vasquez's previous employers, with regards to

the your decision to promote him?
MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation.
Argumentative.
A. No.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did anybody else call 
MS. SAVITT: Calls for 
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. his previous employers?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.

A. I don't know.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Do you know any of these companies on here
listed on the resume?

A. No.

Q. Okay. During your decision to -- the time
that you were deciding to promote Jose Vasquez, did
you know that Jose vasquez had been in prison for any
reason?
Lacks

MS. SAVITT: Argumentative.

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855 

 

Case Documemgg  Page 16 of 61

08/18/11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

11:

58:

58:

58:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

:59foundation. Asked and answered.
A. No.
MR. MALLISON: Mark this as 1206.
THE REPORTER: 5.
MS. SAVITT: 5.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1205 marked for identification.)
BY MR. MALLISON:
Do you recognize this document?
Vaguely, yes.

Do you recognize this form?

Yes.



Can you tell us what the form is.

A. It was the form they signed at the end of
some training for protective equipment, such as
respirators and rubber gloves and safety goggles,
et cetera.

Q. Did you do the training?

A. I don't remember.

Q. Okay. You don't remember if you did it or
Jose Vasquez, or you don't remember if you did the
training generally?

A. Generally, I don't remember if I did the
training.

Q. Okay. It says here -- appears to say on

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

 

 

1212:

12:

12:

12:

12:

12:

12:

12:

12:

12:

Case Documerglg?-EE  Page 17 of 61

O2:
02:
02:
:02:
O2:
02:
02:

02:

02:
02:

02:

:03we11, I don't recall signing it.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay. Do you know if there was a drug
testing policy in place?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Okay. Do you know if people got drug tested
while you were district manager?
MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Calls for
speculation.

A. I don?t recall.
This is 1207.

MR. MALLISON: Maybe have two

of them there. 1207.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1207 marked for identification.)
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Do you recognize this document, this form of
document? I
A. I recognize it.
Q. Do you recognize this exact document, that
is, the one filled out by Jose Vasquez apparently?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Can you take a look at the date which
is on the last page of this document.

A. Okay.

Q. And who's the document signed by, the last

08/18/09

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

1212:

12:

Case DocumerHIE?a-lgg  Page 18 of 61

04:

04

04:

04:

O4:

04:

:04:

04:

O4:

04:

O4:

:04:

:04:

04:

04:

04:

04:

O4:

04:

:05line?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for a conclusion.
A. well, it looks like Tom Cazale.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Okay. And it's --
MS. SAVITT: I'm also -- I'm also new to the
case, so I don't want to be a nitpicker, but it does
say there's supposed to be eight pages and this is
only seven of eight pages. So I just want to
preserve that record -- that for the record.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. So did Tom Cazale take care of Jose
Vasquez's paperwork as part of the promotion? Is
that -- is that essentially his role?

MS. SAVITT:

Lacks foundation. vague.

Calls for a conclusion. Calls for speculation.
Argumentative.
A. Yes.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Okay. And can you tell me the sequence of
events there from the time that you decided to
promote Jose Vasquez until Jose Vasquez completed the
process.
MS. SAVITT:

I'm sorry. I don't understand

the question. "The sequence of events," what? What

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

Case Page 19 of 61

:26:
26:
:26:
:26:
27:
2'7:

2'7:
2'7:
:2'7

2'7:


2'7:




2'7

:28

:28

:28:

:28context, that they had -- that he was just playing
around with Angelica and that he was lifting her up
into the dumpster or whatever, the trash bin. And
had just set her down, and that's when the person who
saw them saw it. And that, you know, they were --
that it wasn't -- you know, he -- he knew that he
shouldn't have been touching her, but that he was,
you know, just playing around basically.
THE REPORTER: 1208.
MR. MALLISON: Introduce 1208.
MS. SAVITT: Thank you.
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1208 marked for identification.)
MR. MALLISON: Looks like we're going to
share.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Have you ever seen this document?

Yes.

l0 to

Can you tell me what it is.
A. It's a letter from the valley Bible

Fellowship to -- to us, to ABM, and explaining what

they saw in regards to the sexual harassment.
Q. Okay. And is this how you became aware of
the incident in the first place?

A. No. First there was a phone call.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

12Case Page 20 of 61

28:
28:
:28:
:28:

28:

28

28:

28:

28:

:28:

:28:

29:

29

29:

29:

29:

:29:

29:

29:

29

29:

:29:

29:

:29:0phone call to you?

A. Yes.

Who called?

A I -- someone from the church. I don't

remember who.

Q. And what did they say?

A. They said that somebody had witnessed Jose
touching one of our janitors and that she appeared to
be not agreeing with it, and that they had called the
police and the police were coming to investigate it.

Q. And I take it you read this letter during

this time period as well?
A. Yes.
MS. SAVITT: vague and ambiguous as to "this

time period."
During the phone call?
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Is there a date on this letter?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And is this about the time that the
incident occurred?
A. Yes.
MS. SAVITT: vague and ambiguous as to
"about the time.?

MR. MALLISON: Is that an objection?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

 

12Case Documegig?gm?r??  Page 21 of 61

29:
29:
29:

29:

29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
29:
:29:
29:
:29:
30:

30:

30:

:30MS. SAVITT: Yes. Because it says the
incident occurred on June 26th, so I don't know if it
means if June 27th is about the time or not. It's a
meaningless question.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. When did the incident occur?

A. Apparently on June 26th.

Q. Okay. Does that comport with your memory
that the incident occurred about June 26th?

A. (Witness nods head.)

Q. And when's the date on this letter?

A. June 27th.

Q. Okay. So this letter occurred approximately
one day after the incident; is that correct?

A. Yes.
Q. Okay. So it was about the same time as the
time that the incident occurred?

MS.

SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous and

argumentative. Unintelligible.
THE WITNESS: I -- was there a question?
I'm sorry. I didn't understand it.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. So this occurred one day after the incident;
is that correct?

A. Yes.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

 

 

 

1212:

12:

Case Page 49:

49:

49:

49:

49:

49:

49:

49:

50:

:5050:

:50No.
MS. SAVITT: Is that correct? He asked --
it's -- it's one of those weird questions. Was -- is

what he said correct?
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did you ever talk to Angelica either
directly or by means of a translator other than
Sylvia?

A. In regards to this -- this investigation?

Q. Valley Bible, yes.

A. No.

Q. When did you become aware that Jose and
Javier Vasquez, if ever, were related?

A. When the anonymous letters came in.

Q. And by the "anonymous letters," referring to
August and September of '05?

A. Yeah.

Q. And at that point, did you believe that they
were related?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for a conclusion.
The point the letter came in?
THE WITNESS: I -- I don't understand the
question either, actually.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. When did you believe that Jose and Javier

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

 

 

1212:

12:

12:

12:

12:

Case Documeaiigai-l?? Efg?gEogngg Page 23 of 61

50:
50:
50:
:50:

:50:

50:
51:
:51:
:51:
:51:
51:
51:
51:
51:
51:
:51:
:51:
:51were related?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for a conclusion. Lacks

foundation. Calls for speculation.
A. I believed it later, after the letters came
in.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Okay.

I don't specifically know when.

Are you familiar with Alexis Vasquez?

No.

Anthony Vasquez?

(Witness shakes head.)



Andrew Vasquez?

A. Actually, Anthony Vasquez might have been a
utility worker.

Q. How about Andrew Vasquez?
No.
Ruben Vasquez?
Yes.
Was he a utility worker?
Yes.
Sonia Vasquez?
No.

Estella Vasquez?



No.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

1212:

12:

Case DocumeRtIEEg-??  Page 24 of 61

53:
:53:
53:
53:
53:
53:

:53:

53:
53:
53:
54:
54:
:54:

54:

55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
:55long as they had different people they reported
to.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Would it have impacted your decision with

regards to Jose Vasquez's promotion if you had known

that Javier's -- Javier was a relative of Jose's?
MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Calls for
speculation.
A. Yes, it probably would have.

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. How so?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.
A. well, I would have been concerned about the
fact that Jose was reporting to Javier and that would
violate the policy.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. It's already marked, 1001.
Do you see that?
MS. SAVITT: What -- what is it we're
marking?
MR. MALLISON: This is Exhibit 1001. we're
not marking it.
MS. SAVITT: But you are identifying it for
the record?

MR. MALLISON: Yes.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09

 

12Case Documelatlg?a?i?  Page 25 of 61

55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
:55:
:55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
:55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
55:
:56:

:56MR. MALLISON:

Q. Do you know what this document is?

A. It's the anonymous letter that came in to
human resources.

Q. In Spanish?

A. In Spanish.

Q- And if I remember your testimony, you did
not see this document while you were district
manager; is that correct?

A. Not that I recall, no.

And you never had it translated for you?

A. Not that I recall.

Okay. And you never saw a translation, just
to be clear?

A. I don't remember seeing the translation, no.

Q. Okay. were you in charge of investigating
the contents of this letter?

Calls for a

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation.

conclusion. Vague and ambiguous.
A. No.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Who was?
MS. SAVITT:

Lacks foundation. Calls for a

conclusion. Calls for speculation. Vague and

ambiguous.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
100

 

Case Documemgg Page 26 of 61

08/18/don't know.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. were you involved in the investigation with
regards to the contents of this letter?
Calls for

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation.

speculation. Calls for a conclusion.

A. I was told that it came in and that they
were going to have it translated. That's the last
thing I remember about it.

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that the
contents of the Spanish letter are roughly equivalent
to the contents of the English letter that came a few

days later?

MS. SAVITT: well, that calls for total
conclusion and speculation. Vague and ambiguous.
Don't even answer that question.

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. You can answer.
MS. SAVITT: He doesn't speak Spanish,

Counsel. He never saw it. How could he possibly

draw a conclusion?
MR. MALLISON: That wasn't my question.

MS. SAVITT: What was your question, then?



 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

Case Documemgg Page 27 of 61

08/18/12:

12:

12:

12:

:58:

58:

58:

58:

58

58:

:58:

58:

58:

58:

:58:

58:

58:

58:

59:

:59MR. VIRAMDNTES: I have it as 1115 from a
previous deposition.
Mark it as 1115.

MR. MALLISON: Okay.

THE REPORTER: So it?s not 1214?

MR. MALLISON: No. Sorry.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Do you recognize this document?

Yes.

When did you first see this document?
Sometime in September of '05.

Can you tell us what it is.

apwpap

It is an anonymous letter that was sent to
human resources.

Q. And by "human resources," can you tell us
what you mean.

A. Human resources for ABM Janitorial in
Sacramento, I believe.

Q. Okay. And why did you see this letter?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.

A. Why did I see this letter? I guess because
I was the distract manager in Bakersfield.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Was it sent to you?

A. It was pouched to me.

Q. Who pouched it to you?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

 

1213:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Documem?g  Page 28 of 61

59:
59:
:59:
59:

59:

59

59:

:59:

59:

59:

59:

59:

:59:

59:

00:

00:

:00Tom Cazale.
Q. Okay. Did you have a conversation with Tom
Cazale about this letter?

A. Yes.

When was that approximately?


A. Approximately September of


'05.
You used the word "pouched."
Did you -- can you explain what "pouched"
means.
A. Courier. It was a -- a pouch that we put

all our interoffice documents in, and the courier
picked them up and took them to where they belonged
to go -- sent, where they were sent.

Q. And you mentioned you had a conversation
with Tom Cazale in September about this letter.

Can you tell me what you said -- what he

said. Excuse me.

A. He basically said that he had received this
letter and that there was some allegations about
Javier being brothers with Jose, and that was about
it.

Q. Did he mention that -- at that time that
there was also a Spanish letter?

A. Yes.

Q. Did he describe any of the differences

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
104

 

Case Eogjrg/lo Page 29 of 61

NER 08/18/between this letter and the Spanish letter?

A. No.

Q. So he didn't mention that Spanish letter
identified the individual?s names that it's related
to?

MS. SAVITT:

I'm sorry. Can I have the

question read back. I just didn't hear it.
(Requested portion of record read.)

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. That he's related to.

A. I don't recall him mentioning that.

Q. So what else did he say?

A. well, he said that there was a name in it of
Erika and that I should look for that name in at

the clinics.
Q. And by "clinics," what does that mean?
A. One of the accounts that the local branch
has, the Clinica Sierra Vista. And so they have 20
locations that the office has and that somebody named
Erika worked in there, and I should try and find that
name.

Q. Okay. And how would you go about doing
that?

MS.

SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous as phrased.

"How would you go about it," that calls for

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

Case Documem?? Page 30 of 61

08/18/02:

O2:

02:

02:

02:

:02:

02:

02:

02:

02:

02:

02:

:02speculation today, or is it "How did you go about
it"?
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. How did you go about finding the name Erika
if you did?

A. I would have checked the payroll records.

Q. And what would that mean to check the
payroll records?

A. I would have looked through the records of
the peOple that were paid in the district.

Q. Okay. And is there a particular system,
payroll system, that you use?

A. Not that I'm aware of.

Q. Is it a database?

A. Yeah, there would be a database of names.

Q. And so you could, for instance, run a search
for all the people that worked at -- at Clinica
Sierra Vista?

A. No. It would have been manual.
Q. Okay. Tell me -- tell me exactly what you
did.

A. It would have been green bar paper and going

through each name on a green bar.

Q. You didn't have access to the computer

system?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Documem?g Page 08/18/09
107
A. The payroll system, no.
Q. So by "green bar," you mean printouts of --
A. Yeah.
Q. The holes on the side?
A. Yeah.
Q. Okay.
MS. SAVITT: Oh, I'm impressed. I didn't

know what it was.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. And what would it mean to go through green
bar to look for Erika? What did you do?

MS. SAVITT: wait. Which question are you
asking?
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. What did you do to look through the green
bar for Erika?

MS. SAVITT: Don't speculate. Just tell him

what you did.

A. I looked through the names.
BY MR. 

Q. Okay. How many names?

A. I don't recall.

Q. How many names work -- how many different
janitors worked in Bakersfield at the time you were

district manager?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Page varied between I'm correct, your job was to
look through 60 or 80 names on the green bar printout
for Erika's name; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Okay. And what did you find?

A. I don't believe I found it.

And why do you think you did not find it?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.

Argumentative. Lacks foundation.

A. Because there was no name on there that said
"Erika." It's the only reason I can figure.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay. Did you -- how many -- how many
Clinicas are there?

A. Roughly 20.

Q. Twenty.

A. Give or take.

Q. Okay. Did you ask anybody if they knew an
Erika that worked at the Clinica?

A. My standard practice, I probably would have
asked Javier, but I don?t recall for sure.

Q. Who -- who actually supervises the employees
Javier?

who work at Clinica?

A. Ultimately. I mean, yeah.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
108

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Documeatlg?g-lf?  Page Who else?

A. Well, the individual supervisor. They work

different accounts, so they were handled by different

supervisors.
Q. Okay. Who were the supervisors?

A. One was Joe and the other one was the guy

who I referred to earlier, and I don't remember his

name.
Q. Mr. -- okay.
And then ultimately Javier?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. But you don't remember if you asked

Javier whether he knew an Erika?

A. I don't specifically remember.

Q. Okay. Did you ask anybody else if they knew
an Erika?

A. Not that I recall.

Q. Okay. What did you do at that point had you
not found Erika in the green bar?

A. I told Tom.

Q. What'd you tell Tom?

A. That I didn't find the name.

Q. When -- when did this search of the green
bar occur?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
109

 

Case Page 34 0f 61 08/18/06:

06:

06:

O6:

06:

06:

06:

06:

06:

O6:

06:

06:

0'7:

0'7:

07:

0'7

07:

0'7:

0'You may answer.

A. Sometime after the letter was received by
Tom.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay. And what time period were you looking
at as far as the green bar?

I take it the green bar is payroll

printouts.

A. Yes.

Q. So what time period were you looking at?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation. Lacks
foundation.

A. well, I would have been looking for the
current time period.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did you look at any prior time periods?

A. I don't recall.

Q. How long did it take you to look through the
green bar?

A. I don't recall.

Q. How long would it take you to look through
the green bar for 60 to 80 names?

A. Fifteen minutes.

Q. Is fifteen minutes a little on the high

side --

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

Case Documem?g  Page 13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

 

 

08/18/09
111
07?? 1 MS. SAVITT: Argumentative. Lacks
2 foundation.
3 BY MR. MALLISON:
O7Q1 4 Q. given the task?
0795 5 A. Yeah, maybe. I don't know. It was -- there
VNZ7 6 was you'd have to go different places, kind of
Vh31 7 look within -- throughout it. So 10, 15 minutes,
Uh33 8 yeah.
Uh38 9 Q. was your assignment from Tom Cazale to look
0W42 10 for names the only assignment he gave you?
0W45 11 A. He had me ask Javier about the allegations
UWSO 12 in this letter about him having brothers and family
VN55 13 members work for it.
0P58 14 Q. Okay. Did you ask Javier about the
084m 15 allegations of sexual harassment?
08w4 16 A. The allegations of sexual -- no, I didn't.
08m9 17 Q. Okay. was that part of your assignment or
08:11 18 not?
=08?i 19 MS. SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous.
08?5 20 A. Tom didn't tell me that until I saw the
08?3 21 letter. Tom didn't tell me over the phone
08?1 22 that that I was looking into sexual harassment. I
0814 23 was just looking for a name.
0&25 24 BY MR. MALLISON:
0817 25 Q. I see. So your first assignment and

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Documel?tlg?g-Igg  Page maybe all of your assignment at this point -- is to
look for the names on the green bar?
A. Yeah. And then also discuss with Javier the
allegations as far as having family members.

Q. Family members?

A. Yeah.

Q. So you didn't have this letter in your
possession at that time?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. What did you talk -- what did Javier
say about the allegations?

A. Said that they were false.

Q. And by "false," we're talking about the
family membership allegations; right?

A. Yes. And I think they also referred to him
as having a side job or something like that.

Q. Okay. Did you talk to him about him hiring

employees from his church?

A. Yes. And so the allegations in here I did.
Q. Okay. Did you talk about Jose's -- the
allegation that Jose had been in -- in jail?

A. I don't recall that.
Q. Is that because you didn't have the letter
and you didn't know about it at the time?

A. Yeah. I mean, Tom didn't mention it, I

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
112

 

 

 

Case Documel?tlg?g-lgg  Page 37 of 61

08/18/don't believe.

Q. I guess I should get really clear about what

Tom said in this first call with you.
What'd he say?

A. He just said that we -- we had received
another letter because -- we had received another
letter from the Spanish one, and that there was some
allegations in it as far as Javier having family and
having a side job. And that, also, there was a name
mentioned that I should look up and that name was
Erika. And that's basically it.
Q. Okay. And did he say why you were looking
it up?

A. No. He just said there was a name mentioned
in there and her name -- and the name was Erika,
could I look up and see if -- you know, if I could
find that name.

Q. And did you -- when you talked to Javier,
did you come to any conclusions with regards to
whether he was hiring his family members?

A. Yeah. He -- I came to the conclusion that
he was not, but he actually had worked -- but Jose
was a family member.

Q. Okay.

A. And I believe I already knew Ruben was, and

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

Case Documem??  Page 38 of 61

08/18/think everybody actually knew Ruben was.
Q. And by "everybody," you mean who?
A. Everybody throughout the company.

Q. would that include Tom Cazale?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.
A. I --
MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation as to
what Mr. Cazale knew.
Don't guess.
A. No. I don't know. I just knew that -- I

just been saying that I thought that other people

knew.

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Okay. It was no secret.

Is that what you're saying?

A. Yes.
MS. SAVITT: Argumentative. Lacks
foundation.
A. Yes, it was not a secret that Ruben was a

family member.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. And that -- that wasn't a problem?

A. No, because he was a utility worker and on
the org chart, he reported to the district manager.

THE REPORTER: What kind of chart was that?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Docume%%?%??g  Page THE WITNESS: Org, o-r-g.

THE REPORTER: Thank you.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did you have another conversation with Tom
Cazale about this letter after that initial call?

A. Yeah. Letting him know that I didn't find
the name Erika and that -- you know, what I had
talked to Javier about.

Q. Did you what did Javier say about 
about the side job issue?

A. He said he didn't have one, that he didn't
have time for it.

Q. Did you come to a conclusion in that regard?
A. Yes. I believed him.

Q. Did Tom give you any other assignments with
regards to investigating this letter?

A. Not that I recall.

Q. Okay. Did you do anything other than run --

look through the green bar and talk to Javier?

A. I'm sorry. That distracted me. I didn't
hear the question.
MR. MALLISON: That's all right. we might

as well hold on here for a second.
MR. VIRAMONTES: It's backup.

MR. MALLISON: It?s backup.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
115

 

 

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

13:

Case Page MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did -- did Tom Cazale give you any other
assignments with regards to investigating this
letter --

A. No.

Q. -- is the first question.

And did you do anything other than, for
purposes of investigating this letter, review the
green bar and talk to Javier?

A. I did nothing else besides that.

Q. Okay. During the time you were doing this
investigation, did you learn why you were looking up
Erika's name?

A. Yes. Tom sent me the letter. Pouched me
the letter, actually.

Q. So you read this letter during your

investigation?
A. Yes.
Q. What was your -- what was your impression of

this letter when you first read it?

MS. SAVITT: Calls for an opinion. Calls

for a characterization. Calls for a conclusion.
Irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.

A. well, you know, it was an anonymous letter,

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
116

 

1414:

14:

14:

14:

14:

14:

Case DocumerHI??-gg  Page 47:

:47:

47:

47:

47:

47:

47:

:47chose his words.

Q. The Cazale e-mail, first meeting on -- in
Bakersfield on Monday, do you remember what that
meeting was about?

A. I do not.

Q. And there's a reference to -- response to a
letter of September 16, 2005.

Do you know what that's in reference to?

A. Yes. He's referring to the letter that he
responded to, the anonymous Spanish written letter.
THE REPORTER: 1216.
MS. SAVITT: Thank you.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
1216 marked for identification.)
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. I recognize you can't read Spanish, but do
you recognize this letter?

MS. SAVITT: From when he worked there?
MR. MALLISON: Sure.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. From when you worked there.

A. I didn't see it when I worked there. This
is the first time I've seen it.

Q. Okay. But you understood there was a
Spanish letter that was sent to -- in response to the

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
134

 

1414:

14:

Case Docume?ii??gi??;  Page 42 of 61

48:
48:
48:
48:
48:
48:
:48:
48:
48:
:49:
49:
49:

49:

49:
49:
49:
49:
49:

50:

50:
:50anonymous letter;

A.

Q.

is that correct?
Yes.

When you were a district manager, had you

ever heard of the name Erika Morales?

A.

Q.

No.

Do you know if the two anonymous letters

were sent from the same address?

A.

Q.

Church itself?

A.



Q.
account?

A.

Q.

A.

I do not.

Are you familiar with the valley Bible
Have you ever been there?

Yes.

How are you familiar with it?

I just clarify it's Valley Bible Fellowship.
Fellowship.
Right. I went there to bid the job.

So that's your account? You won that
Yes.

Had you ever been there before?
No.

MS. SAVITT: well, before he 
MR. MALLISON:

Before he won the account.

No.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q.

So when you went over the allegations of the

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES

877.955.3855

08/18/09
135

 

 

Case Documem?g  Page 43 of 61

08/18/anonymous letter with Javier, did you do any other
investigation other than asking him what his response
was to that those allegations?

A. No.

Q. Did Tom request that you do any other
investigation?

A. No.

Q. Do you know who did any investigation of the
allegations, if any?

A. No, I don't.

When did you leave ABM's employ?

A. November of 2005.

Did anything happen between September and
November relating to any allegations of sexual
harassment other than what we've talked about?

A. Not that I can recall.

Q. Did you change your opinion about the
veracity of any of the statements in the anonymous

letter between September and November?

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Calls for an
opinion. Calls for a conclusion. Argumentative.
Irrelevant. Compound.

A. No.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. So you believed all of the allegations in

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

1414:

14:

14:

Case Documerhtl??a-gg  Page 44 of 61

53:

53:
53:

:53:

:53:
53:

53:
:53:

53:

53:

53:
:53:
:53:
:53MR. MALLISON: No, it's not.

MS. SAVITT: Yeah, it absolutely is.

MR. MALLISON: I need to know what his
conclusion was.

MS. SAVITT: A lay witness's opinions and
conclusions are irrelevant.

MR. MALLISON: I want to know exactly what
his conclusion was.

THE REPORTER: You guys are speaking over

each other.

MS. SAVITT: I would like to finish my
objection.

MR. MALLISON: That's fine.

MS. SAVITT: I will try not to speak over
you.

Conclusions and opinions are -- of lay

witnesses are improper.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. I'd like your conclusion with regards to
whether or not you thought anything in here was true
as of the conclusion of your investigation in
September 2005, and that is with regards to
Exhibit 1115.

A. I -- I believe that Jose and Javier were

cousins.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
133

 

14Case Page 45 of 61

54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:

54:

54:
54:
54:
54:
:54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:
54:

:54That's the only thing in here that you
believe was true as far as these allegations are
concerned?

MS. SAVITT: Argumentative.

A. To the best of my memory, yes.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Did that opinion change by the time you left
in November of 2005?

MS. SAVITT: Asked and answered.
THE WITNESS: Did what opinion?
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. That that is the only true statement.

A. I'm sorry. I thought I just asked -- I
thought that's what you were --

Q. I was talking about a note -- in
September of 2005, what in this letter did you
believe to be true?

A. Okay. That's what I stated then.

Right.

A. And it didn't change.

And it didn't change through November.
Has it changed through today?
MS. SAVITT: Irrelevant. Don't answer that

question.

He's not here to give opinions about this

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
139

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Documem??  Page Can you tell me the question again.

BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Sure. If an investigation should have
occurred, it's not your fault that it didn't occur;

is that correct?

MS. SAVITT: I'm going to object as an
incomplete hypothetical because it lacks foundation
as to what should have occurred. Calls for
speculation and it's argumentative.

THE WITNESS: And I'm sorry. I thought you
were asking me if a followwup didn't happen, the
follow?up investigation. And you took the word
"follow-up" out of your question.

BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. Okay. If a follow?up investigation should
have occurred as a result of this meeting you had
with Javier, you weren't assigned that task and it's
not your fault it didn't occur; is that correct?

MS. SAVITT: Compound. Argumentative.
Vague.

A. That's correct.
BY MR. MALLISON:

Q. And that's because Tom Cazale hadn't given
you that assignment; is that correct?

MS.

SAVITT: Same objections.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
146

 

 

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15'.

15:

15:

Case Documer?tl??a-lf?  Page That's correct.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Okay. If it turns out in this letter that
Jose Vasquez was in jail for sexual harassment or
something like that, you weren't assigned that task
to find that out; is that correct?

MS. SAVITT: Asked and answered.
Argumentative.

A. That is correct.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Because Tom Cazale didn't give you that
task; is that correct?

MS. SAVITT: Argumentative.
A. That's correct.
BY MR. MALLISQN:
Q. Okay. Do you know if he assigned that task
to anybody else?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for speculation.
A. I do not.
BY MR. MALLISON:
Q. Is there any other violation of ABM code of
ethics that caused you to leave 
Lacks foundation. Assumes a

MS. SAVITT:

fact not established. He never said he left because

of a violation of a code of ethics. Argumentative.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
147

 

Case Page 48 0f 61 08,1835:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

35:

:35regional meeting that they had once a year.

Q. When you say "a regional meeting," was there
some training at this regional meeting?

A. It was like a twoeday training or day, I
should say. I'm not sure how many days. It was a
couple days of training, and it was up in Reno and it
was team building, training. Just kind of a regional
annual meeting.

Q. Do you remember who your trainers were for
these the two-day training in Reno?

A. It was pretty various group of people.

Q. The two-day training in Reno, was that a
one-time event or did that happen more than once?

A. It happened annually.

Q. Do you remember the ABM entities that any of
the trainers worked for?

MS. SAVITT: Calls -- lacks foundation.
Calls for speculation.

A. No. I mean, other than janitorial, I don't
know that there was anybody else.
BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. Do you remember the names of any of the
corporate HR individuals that you interacted with at

the two-day training in Reno?

A. No.

 


877.955.3855

 

Case Documem?g  Page 49 of 61

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

08/18/09
167

3&04 1 Q. Do you remember their job titles?
36:06 2 A. No. I no.
3&08 3 Q. Do you remember anything any identifying
36?1 4 information about these individuals?
36:12 5 A. No.
3&13 6 Q. Whether it was a male or female?
3&15 7 A. No. I just think that they may have been in
3&21 8 attendance.
3&22 9 Q. When you say that you think they may have
3&27 10 been in attendance, did you see anyone that you
3&30 11 recognized as being from ABM corporate or they had an
3&33 12 ABM Corporate name tag or that somehow was identified
3&37 13 as ABM Corporate?
36:38 14 A. NO.
3&33 15 Q. During your time at ABM, did you ever
3W16 16 witness anything that you thought violated the ABM
3N19 17 Code of Business Conduct and Ethics?
3h21 18 MS. SAVITT: Overbroad. Lacks foundation.
3%23 19 Calls for a conclusion. Calls for an opinion.
3h25 20 Irrelevant. Not reasonably calculated to lead to the
3P30 21 discovery of admissible evidence.
3N31 22 A. Not that I recall.
37:32 23 BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
33KB 24 Q. You said you were in charge of doing the
3&07 25 ABM I guess sort of advertising and outreach to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

Case Documem?g  Page 50 of 61

08/18/15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

:38:

38:

38:

38:

:38:

38:

38:

38:

:38:

38:

38:

38:

38:

:38potential clients when you were the district
representative; is that right?

A. I didn't really do any advertising, but 

Q. You were in charge of soliciting clients;
correct?

A. Yes.

Q. were there any contracts that you had that

were statewide or national while you were at 

MS. SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous. Calls for
a legal conclusion. Lacks foundation. Calls for
speculation.
A. Yes, statewide.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. How did you come to know that ABM had
statewide contracts?

MS. SAVITT: Same objections.

A. I was the district representative. I
mean or the district manager. Either way, I knew
that we had national contacts contracts.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. National?

A. I'm sorry. State. I'm not sure if they
were all I don't know if any were national. I
know they were statewide.

Q. Do you know who negotiated the statewide

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

1515:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Documel?lg?g?g  Page :39:

39:

39:

39:

39:

39:

:39:

:39:

39:

:3908/18/09
169
contracts?
A. I do not.
Q. Are these statewide contracts -- was the

mon -- the -- the monitory amounts negotiated by
someone other than yourself?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know who negotiated them?
MS. SAVITT: Asked and answered.
A. I do not.
BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
Q. Do you know what ABM entity negotiated them?
MS. SAVITT:

Lacks foundation. Calls for a

legal conclusion. Calls for speculation.
A. I do not.
BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:
Q. You said you weren't sure if there were any
national contracts.
You don't know one way or the other or are
you saying you just can't remember?
A. There -- they --
MS. SAVITT: Don't speculate.
Are you saying you don't know one way or the
other are you saying you don't remember?
THE WITNESS:

I don't know one way or the

other.

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

Case Documel?lgag??g  Page 52 of 61

08/18/MR. VIRAMONTES:
Q. So it's possible that there were national
contracts in place while you were working at 
correct?
MS. SAVITT:

Anything's possible. Calls for

a conclusion. Argumentative. Lacks foundation.
BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. You can answer.

A. It is possible.

Q. As far as you know, was there any statewide

marketing of ABM janitorial services?

MS. SAVITT: Vague and ambiguous. Calls for
a conclusion. Lacks foundation.
A. It was my understanding we had no marketing

or advertising budget.
BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:

Q. Is it your understanding that there was any
attempt to do statewide sales, to get statewide
contracts?

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Vague.
Calls for Speculation.

A. It's my understanding that, yeah, they were

after statewide contracts.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. Do you know what the ABM entities were doing

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

Case Documem?g  Page 53 of 61

08/18/recall what it had on there. It's kind of your
typical corporate web site, just kind of corporate
information.
Q. Did you ever ask your clients to go onto the
ABM web site to get additional information about the
company?
MS. SAVITT: Objection. Irrelevant.
A. Not that I recall.
BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
Q. To your understanding, what was the name of
the ABM entity that employed you?
MS. SAVITT: Calls for a legal conclusion.
A. ABM -- I worked for the Northern California
ABM Janitorial.
BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
Q. When you were working as either the district
representative or district manager at ABM, did you

have a retirement program?

A. I don?t know.

Q. Did you have an employee stock option plan?

A. Possibly.

A. You don't know one way or the other?

A. I don't know one way or the other. I'm
sorry.

Q. Did you have health insurance?

 

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

15:

Case Docume?tlg?g?g;  Page 54 of 61

:43:
:43:
43:
:43:

44:

44:
:44:
44:
44:

44:

44:
44:
44:
44:
44:
44:
44:
44:
44:

44:

:44don't remember.

Q. Now, when a client paid for ABM services,
ABM Janitorial Services, for the statewide contracts,
do you know where that money would go to?
MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Calls for
speculation.
MS. HAYWARD: Irrelevant.
MS. SAVITT: You need to lay some foundation
as to whether he has knowledge of any of these areas.
He was a little district manager in one district.
Where money's distributed -- you have to lay some
foundation otherwise I think you're harassing him.

MR. VIRAMDNTES: That's precisely my point.

I want to understand what he -- what he knows.

MS. SAVITT: No. You have to lay a
foundation. You don't just ask him, "What about
this" and "What about that."

BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:

Q. You can answer.

MB. SAVITT: It's abuse of the process.
THE WITNESS: Did I -- do I know where the
money went?
BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:
Q. That's right.
A. You mean like -- you mean like when they pay

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
173

 

 

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Page their bills, where the bill actually -- the check
they paid their bill with?

Q. That's right.

MS. SAVITT: For the statewide contracts.

So you haven't even established if he knows -- if he
ever saw where those bills went.

A. San Francisco.
BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:

Q. And how do you know that?

A. well, all the billing was returned to San
Francisco.

Q. When you say "all the billing," is that even
including the local contracts you had?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you know what individual in San
Francisco the billing was sent to?
MS. SAVITT: Overbroad as to time.
BY MR. VIRAMDNTES:

Q. What -- what are the names of the entities
that you remember that ABM had statewide contracts
with during the time that you worked there?

MS. SAVITT: I -- I think that -- I don't

know enough about this case, but I don't want this
And I also don't know about

witness speculating.

getting into their trade secrets and their client

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
174

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Documem?g  Page lists. I'm going to leave that up to Ms. Hayward

because I don't know if that's the proper subject of
discovery unless it's already been agreed to by the
judge. I just don't know enough about this case.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. You can answer.
MS. HAYWARD: well, I thought he actual --
MS. SAVITT: I mean, I think client lists

are private, but that's been gone into and counsel

for ABM doesn't care, I don't care. But I don't -- I
don't want him speculating as to who their clients
are.

MS. HAYWARD: well, I thought he already
testified that he didn't know, but he can answer the
question whether or not he knows there are any.

A. A couple of the accounts that I knew that
were statewide were Union Bank and Bank of America,
and that's all I can recall. 0h, Citibank.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. Did you have any role in -- in managing the
statewide Union Bank account that was done out of
your area?

A. I'm not clear on what you're asking me.

Q. well, there was a statewide account for

Union Bank; correct?

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
175

 

Case Page 57 of 61

08/18/and they were happy.

Q. And what were your responsibilities with
regard to the statewide accounts?

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation.

A. Well, my responsibilities as far as keeping
the customer service level would have been the same.
I would have gone in and talked with the customer,
make sure we're providing a service that they
expected.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. But for the statewide accounts, you didn't
come up with a price; correct?
A. Correct.

Q. For the statewide accounts, was it your job
to estimate the time for each of the buildings?

A. Yeah, because we would have specifically
gone through the building and, you know, measured it
out or whatever.

Q. Who told you that there were statewide
accounts for 

A. Brian Huckabee.

Q. What did Brian Huckabee tell you about the
statewide accounts?

A. That we had some.

Q. Other than telling you that you had

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

 

1515:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Documem?g  Page 58 of 61

50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
50:
:50statewide accountsyour
responsibilities with regard to the statewide
accounts?

A. well, at the time he would have told me I
would he would have -- I wouldn't have been I
was in the district representative position and I
would have not been pursuing any of those for
selling. So no, probably other than, you know,
just if you get a complaint, send it to him so he
could take care of it.

Q. Did your responsibilities change with regard
to statewide contracts when you became the district
manager?

A. well, in in the way that I've said that
it would. I'd be more responsible for any complaints
or anything like that, going out and resolving any
customer service issues.

Q. And you you talked about statewide
contracts and the possible existence of national

contracts. I understand that.

My question's going
to be a little different.

Do you know of any regional contracts that
went outside of the state, like perhaps a west coast

contract or a southwest contract that would encompass

multiple states?

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
178

 

Case Documer??g??g  Page 59 of 61

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

08/18/09
181

5&03 1 even asked him if he's ever seen one of them. You
5%05 2 know, that's how you establish foundation.
5&09 3 Have you seen one of the contracts? Have
53?1 4 you read one of the contracts? Do you know what the
53?2 5 contract says? You don't just say, "Do you know if
53?4 6 it covers this? Do you know if it covers that?"
5&13 7 Lacks foundation, every one of your
5319 8 questions, Counsel. You're a government lawyer.
5&21 9 I -- I hold you to a very high standard.
5311 10 MS. SAVITT: I'm also going to object that I
5313 11 don't know what relevance this has because it's only
5345 12 the ABM janitorial entity that's at issue here.
5&30 13 we're not talking about securities or parking or
5&33 14 anything like that. So I don't think it has any
5%35 15 relevance to this case whatsoever.
53:38 16 MR. VIRAMONTES: Thank you.
5&45 17 MS. SAVITT: Don't answer.
53:45 18 BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
5&47 19 Q. The statewide contracts, do you know if
5349 20 those are a flat rate contract?
5&51 21 MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Irrelevant.
5&55 22 A. I -- no, they weren't flat rate. They were
5&57 23 by square foot.
53:59 24 BY MR. VIRAMONTES:
5&59 25 Q. And when you say they were by square foot,

 

 

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

 

 

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

15:

Case Page what does that mean?

A. There was a price per square foot that each
location would have. There was a square footage that
each location had, and then the contract had a
per-square-foot dollar amount associated with it, and
basically do the multiplication.

Q. And you had no role in negotiating that
per-square-foot price; correct?

MS. SAVITT: Asked and answered.

A. No.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. Do you know if there were any security
cameras at any of the cleaning sites at Bakersfield
during the time that you worked at 

MS. SAVITT: Lacks foundation. Calls for
speculation.

A. I'm sure there was security cameras at the
banks.

BY MR. VIRAMONTES:

Q. Did you ever ask for any security video with

regard to any of the investigations you conducted?

MS. SAVITT: At the banks?
MR. VIRAMONTES: Any of the sexual
harassment investigations.

MS. SAVITT: We're at banks.

 

SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS AND LEGAL TECHNOLOGIES
877.955.3855

08/18/09
182

 

 

 

 

Case Document 252-35 Filed 06/03/10 Page STATE OF CALIFORNIA 
ss.
COUNTY OF KERN 

I, Amy Maier, a Certified shorthand Reporter in
the State of California, holding Certificate No. 13248,
do hereby certify that RICHARD EUGENE STEINER, the
witness named in the foregoing deposition, was by me
duly sworn; that said deposition was taken Tuesday, 
August_18, 2009, at the time and place set forth on the
first page hereof. I

That upon the taking of the deposition, the
words of the witness were written down by me in
stenotypy and thereafter transcribed by computer under
my supervision; that the foregoing is a true and correct
transcript of the testimony given by the witness.
I further certify that I am neither counsel for
nor in any way related to any party to said action, nor 
in any way interested in the result or outcome thereof.

Dated this 3rd day of September, 2009, at

Bakersfield, California.



 

Amy ?iier, No. 13248