Monday, April 13, 2009

Strange Defense Strategy

The defense claims that I essentially "had a business" because the two clients I drive came to a new company with me. Did CTG complain when they were the ones billing those two clients for about 40K? Of course not. Did they object to providing services to those clients when I drove for CTG? Of course not. Now they want to insinuate that I am a businessperson because those two clients left CTG when I did.

What a JOKE.

NEWSFLASH! I was ill this past Monday and one client actually ALLOWED herself to be driven by another Chauffeur, and when I was on a stretch as-directed Friday evening, the other client was driven by yet another Chauffeur!!!!!

I guess this means they accept the fact that I am not always available and therefore, may be driven by another Chauffeur on occasion.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Under Advisement And Other News......

The lawsuit has been taken under advisement by a Judge who will decide whether or not this case should proceed.


News Flash! The two clients I drove BEFORE I went to CTG and after I left have ridden with other Chauffeurs when I am sick or have the day off!!!! Your argument that I "have a business" won't wash. The clients aren't MINE. They are people who pay whatever company I am working for. You will receive the receipts the clients paid, but that will also include who the Chauffeur was on that particular day.

The funniest moment had to be when Mr. Pazzaneze's lawyer told my lawyer that I "threw coffee on his town car at Logan Airport."

What's more embarrassing? You having to lie or the fact that you are now back to driving your own car again because you don't want to or can't afford to pay employees?

Trust me, if I threw coffee at a CTG vehicle, Mr. Pazzaneze would have called my employer so fast it's not even funny. Why the lies, Mike? Are you that worried? Maybe you should be worried since I am in the process of going through all 1100 jobs and figuring out the 50% of the base you supposedly paid me. Remember the agreement "we have"? The one you mentioned when you signed a deposition under penalty of perjury? The one that doesn't actually exist?

The President of the New England Livery Association is a liar. What type of man lies about women? Weak ones.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Request To Dismiss Will Be Heard In Court on April 7, 2009

CTG's request to dismiss my case will be heard this Tuesday morning.

Stay turned.

Let The Subpeonas Fly, Baby!

Well, well, well.....the attorney for CTG has subpoenaed the two clients I drove exclusively at CTG and the company I now work for, since both those clients decided to switch livery companies when I left CTG. They want to establish that I received money from the two clients, thereby making me an Independent Contractor, and that I am currently employed on a 1099-basis for my employer.

GUESS WHAT, YOU DOPE? I NEVER RECEIVED A PENNY FROM ANY CLIENT THAT WAS PAID DIRECTLY TO ME AND I AM A W-2 EMPLOYEE AT MY CURRENT COMPANY. DON'T YOU REMEMBER BILLING THE CLIENTS AND PAYING ME 10 BUCKS PER HOUR PLUS GRATUITY FOR ALL THOSE AS-DIRECTEDS?

Nice try attempting to get my employer to give YOU the names of everyone I have driven since I joined this company. Isn't your so-called attorney smart enough to know that my employer doesn't have to provide you with any information proprietary to their business? Did you think you were just going to get the names of the companies we service so you could go after that business with lower prices? What an effing joke you are. The only information you are entitled to is the date I started with my new employer and whether or not I am an employee or an Independent Contractor. You aren't getting a copy of all my driver trip-tickets.