After reviewing the evidence provided regarding the dispute between Ms. Mendoza and Mr. Flood, I have determined there is no factual evidence of racial or sexual discrimination. However, I have found underlying issues that have led up to these events. There are many statements within the documents that display a lack of communication between both parties.

Ms. Mendoza claims she was overlooked for a promotion to a supervisory position due to her being a Hispanic female, despite being highly qualified. After reviewing both claims, Ms. Mendoza proves she has the appropriate amount of experience and education for the position. In fact, Mr. Flood does not dispute these qualifications. However, based on the statements provided, there appears to be evidence that Ms. Mendoza lacks leadership skills required for the position. I found no direct evidence to support the claim that she was discriminated against for being a Hispanic female. In fact, one third of the current supervisors are Hispanic. Moreover, in the last five years, of those promoted to division supervisor positions, one third have been female, and one fifth have been Hispanic. Ms. Mendoza states that two white males have been promoted in the past twelve years of her working in the department. However, Ms. Mendoza herself states that she has been promoted five times in that time period. Many of the statements and claims made by Ms. Mendoza are based on hearsay and personal feelings, not facts. In contrast, the majority of Mr. Flood’s statements are based in fact.

In her original complaint, Ms. Mendoza claims she was overlooked for the position due to her being a Hispanic female. Mr. Flood disputes this, claiming Ms. Mendoza was not an ideal candidate due to her abrasive personality and detrimental effect on the performance of others. This claim was further supported by a supervisor in the Treasury department, who stated Ms. Mendoza frequently upset other employees in the department, and subsequently they are much happier when she is absent from work. Furthermore, Tom Adams, the supervisor who received the lateral transfer, confirmed the other supervisors’ claim and took it one step further, stating that about half of the departments bookkeepers and clerks would most likely leave if Ms. Mendoza were to be promoted to supervisor. Mr. Flood concluded his decision by citing more examples that fall in line with the reports of other employees. The sheer number of employees who had negative feelings toward Ms. Mendoza supports Mr. Flood’s claim. On the other hand, Ms. Mendoza’s claim is based on hearsay. She claims she was well respected by her coworkers, however her examples, which include being on a Christmas party committee, being a “spokesperson for the Hispanic coworkers,” and treasurer for the Miami Lakes Hispanic American Association, provide no proof that she would be effective in a management position.

Ms. Mendoza filed a second complaint following her annual performance appraisal, claiming her evaluation was in retaliation for filing the first complaint. Ms. Mendoza received a “satisfactory” rating following twelve years of “excellent” ratings. The evaluation included five specific examples of inappropriate behavior. Ms. Mendoza herself does not dispute most of these claims, instead tries, unsuccessfully, to defend them. Mr. Flood admits that previous reviews were inflated to help employees deal with the rising cost of living. Mr. Flood made it clear that Ms. Mendoza was not the only one who had a less than favorable evaluation, in fact, two thirds of the department had received lower scores than previous years. Mr. Flood goes on to provide more specific examples of inappropriate behavior on the part of Ms. Mendoza. Mr. Flood provides an ample amount of factual evidence that proves Ms. Mendoza does not display the work ethic required for the management position. Ms. Mendoza’s claim of retaliation is unsubstantiated. Based on the factual evidence provided, it is of my opinion that Mr. Flood displayed no discriminating actions towards Ms. Mendoza. Mr. Flood’s choice to promote Tom Adams is completely justified based on Mr. Adams previous management experience.

While analyzing the statements from both parties, it is clear that there was a lack of communication that could have led to Ms. Mendoza’s complaints. I feel the following suggestions would drastically improve the productivity of the Treasurers department, as well as create a positive work environment. Because of the ill feelings between Ms. Mendoza and the bookkeeping department, I recommend that everyone participates in a meeting to discuss and solve the problems that persist. Weekly meetings should be implemented to ensure that everybody on the same page, and to promote open communication. This will eliminate any confusion between departments and cut down conflict. In order to avoid surprises at annual evaluations, I recommend a system should be implemented in which employees are formally written up for inappropriate behavior, and create a standard procedure for applying consequences. Conversely, there should also be a formal acknowledgment system put in place, to promote a positive work environment. These changes will create a better work environment and improve employees’ productivity.