Search ANY word Search ALL words Search EXACT phrase    Help

Follows is the complete text of my Affidavit written in support of my workers Compensation claim filed against the Department of Education some time ago. The claim had been through a few hearings and was denied by the agency that processes such claims. A hearing on the appeal was scheduled in November of 2005. At a settlement conference the month before it continued to be apparent that the state was not willing to offer any settlement. The state tactic (The same as any lawyer in a legal proceeding is of course delay.) was to schedule a hearing which would be on Oahu while I lived on Maui. I would schedule a flight over and then they would request a rescheduling to another time. Since I am truly a pauper with no money such a maneuver is very effective in making it hard to fight. Seeing this on the horizon I asked if there were another means. It was suggested I could plead my case on the written record. This is what I opted to do.

My basic contention is that I have suffered psychological damage as a result of trying to work for the DOE as a substitute teacher. The DOE's position is that I am manifesting a pre existing condition of narcissistic antisocial behavior and that I wasn't even employed by the DOE on the date specified on the claim form.
 

At this point I certainly don't expect anything approach a fair hearing or any compensation, but I have learned a lot about the failings of the DOE and I am in a position to share that information on my web site. I trust the reader will find the material interesting and perhaps some of the problems of the DOE will be address by concerned individuals in the state of Hawaii.

Dr. George R. Harker,  Maui  2005
 
 
 

AFFIDAVIT OF DR. GEORGE R. HARKER REGARDING THE TRAUMA OF WORKING
             FOR THE HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
                   PREPARED NOVEMBER 30, 2005

                       Case No. 70710164

Dr. George R. Harker, pro se
PO. Box 1137
Kihei, HI 96753-1137
 

         DECLARATION OF CLAIMANT DR. GEORGE R. HARKER

George R. Harker, being duly sworn upon oath and upon penalty and perjury hereby declare the
following:
     1.    That I am the Claimant in the above-entitled matter.
     2.   That I received my BS. In Agriculture in 1966 from Ohio State University.
     3.   That I received my MS in natural resources management in 1968 from Ohio State
     University.
     4.   That I received my PhD from Texas A&M University in 1974 in Recreation Resource
     Management. I was employed as a university professor at Western Illinois University
     from 1970 to 1991.
     5.   My worker Compensation claim against the Department of Education derives from the
     mental duress I have been subject to because of the discriminatory actions manifest by
     the DOE.
     6.   My first awareness of the discrimination within the State of Hawaii Department of
     Education came from a conversation with Fred Foss in 1998. I indicated to Fred my
     intention to work as a substitute teacher with the DOE. Fred, a retired Canadian School
     Administrator advised that I was over qualified and a Haole. He advised that individuals
     of Japanese ancestry were in control of the local school system and would effectively
     shunt me out of the teaching business. Foss claimed that what he spoke was well known
     among the educational community. He suggested I would be better off pursuing some
     other method of making a living.
     7.   Initially I discounted Foss’ words. Later I would find that there is a historical basis for
     the prominence of the Japanese decent individuals within the school systems of Hawaii.
     It seems that it was the early Japanese that developed many of the first schools in the
     Hawaiian Islands. See pages 308 regarding the Japanese language schools in Gavan
     Daws, Shoal of Time 1968, Honolulu.
     8.   One can not live in Hawaii and not be aware of the pervasive influence of the role of
     Japanese decent individuals on the working and culture of Hawaii. Particularly in the
     Department of Education. The book People and Cultures of Hawaii, A Psychocultural
     Profile, edited by John F. McDermott, Jr., Wen-Shing Tseng, Thomas W. Maretzki pages
     73-99 gives a good overview and the context of this workers compensation claim.
 “For a newcomer to this state, and especially for anyone who plans to work and live as
part of the community, identification of general and positive stereotypes of the Japanese as seen
by others might be useful. For example, the Japanese like to be seen as possessing qualities of
personal cleanliness, orderly behavior, and stoicism under physical pain and poverty; they also
like to be know for their appreciation of hard, meticulous, and completed work with an overlay
of thrift.
 In addition, the Japanese are oriented to the group rather than to the individual. They feel
a deep sense of obligation to family, village, and country. Moreover, the loyalty and obedience
of a child toward parents and siblings are the basic virtues which are prototypes for other
loyalties. Outward expressions of respect and consideration for the aged and love for children are
a common observation the Japanese. The good name of the family (or other unit) takes
precedence over all personal considerations. Personal achievement is valued for the honor it
brings to the family and, reciprocally, humiliation of the family is the ultimate shame.
  Finally, there seems to be a keen awareness and acceptance in the Japanese of a well-
defined hierarchy whether it be in the family, institution, or society in general; there is comfort in
knowing one's place in the hierarchy."
Page 82, People and Cultures of Hawaii, A Psychocultural Profile edited by John F.
McDermott, Jr.; Wen-Shing Tseng; Thomas W. Maretzki; The University Press of Hawaii 1980.
     9.   I took the two day course required of a potential substitute teacher on March 4 and March
     6, 1998. The course Substitute Teacher Seminar at Maui Community School for
     Adults was taught by Gwyen Ueoka.
     10.  Having completed the course the next requirement is to be placed on the “preferred call
     list” of a school. Only if you are on the list will you be called by the system. The way to
     get on the list is to interview at a school. We were told in the seminar that substitute
     teachers were needed particularly at the high schools.
     11.  March 9, 1998 I met with Howard Omura, Principal Maui High to request placement on
     the call list. He recounted to me that not everyone was suited to be a substitute teacher. A
     small Japanese descent women was more often able to handle some of the students than
     others. Nevertheless he indicated I would be put on the preferred list and if I didn’t work
     out my name would be removed. I indicated that would be fine and thanked him for the
     consideration.
     12.  March 16, 1998 I wrote Kaipo Miller, Vice Principal, Henry Baldwin high School
     regarding my previous meeting with him and noting a need for a letter placing me on the
     priority list. I had been told it was no particular problem and that my letter was part of the
     formality of the process.
     13.  March 30, 1998 I had a Monday 2: PM meeting with Peter Daniels regarding my
     application to be a substitute teacher. My firing from WIU was discussed and I was told
     it would not be a problem.
     14.  April 20, 1998 I visited Theresa H. Sakevitz’s class with the idea of teaching the class as
     a substitute in a few days.
     15.  Later on April 20, 1998 I contact Peter Daniels regarding my tentative plans to cover
     Sakevitz’s class. Daniels explained that neither Baldwin or Maui High school was willing
     to put me on the preferred list and thus I am not in the system and can not be accessed to
     teach Sakevitz’s class. Daniels’ relates that he has talked with Walice Fujii (Principle
     Baldwin High) and Howard Omura (Principle Maui High) According to Daniels, both
     feel Harker would not work out well with high school students.
     16.  Daniels suggests I contact Fujii and explain need to cover Sakevitz’s class.
     17.  On April 21, 1998, I contact Mrs. Shimada, Baldwin High School. She talks with
     Principle Fujii. Still not on the priority list. She indicates that she will schedule a meeting
     and call me back to advise of the time. She never calls back.
     18.  In time I will learn that Theresa H. Sakevitz’s a white Haole female is also subject to
     discrimination in the Hawaii Department of Education.
     19.  On April 30, 1998, I meet Susan Schofield, Principle, Kekaulike High School, Pukalani,
     HI 96768 who questions why I would want to teach in the Hawaii school system given
     the level of my experience and credentials. She indicates that she will check with Peter
     Daniels and get back to me. She never does.
     20.  April 30, 1998, I also meet John Costales, acting VP Pukalani Elementary. According to
     him there is a directive limiting putting people on the preferred list. He will look into
     putting me on the general pool list and will contact Peter Daniels and let me know in a
     week or so by phone or letter of the outcome.
     21.  April 30, 1998, I leave my resume with secretary at Kihei Elementary for Ron Okamura.
     Okumura does not return calls and there is no further contact.
     22.  April 30, 1998, I also leave my resume with the secretary at Lokelani Intermediate,
     Marion Muller Principal. I never hear from her regarding my resume.
     23.  On May 14, 1998, I receive a letter from John Costales, Jr. citing a “catch 22" in that he
     can not put me in the general pool without putting me on the priority list and he will not
     put me on the priority list.
     24.  In the summer of 1998, I miss a house payment of about $286 since I am unable to secure
     work. While my payment record has been flawless for some twenty years plus this will
     set the stage for the loss of everything I own in the years to follow.
     25.  On September 1, 1998, I contacted the office of Paul Brown seeking to discuss and
     resolve the failure of being placed on the priority phone list.
     26.  September 2, 1998, Ms. Andrea Kaumeheiwa calls taking over Peter Daniels position and
     indicates she will look into things regarding my concerns about not being placed on the
     priority call list.
     27.   Nothing transpires and I advise Kaumeheiwa by fax and certified letter that I will be
     taking the matter into the Federal district court.
     28.  September 26, 1998, Kaumeheiwa calls and says she will be “hurt and crushed if named
     in suite.” She suggest that I contact Vance Yatsurshiro at Lahina Intermediate regarding
     substitute teaching. She indicates she is trying to schedule another interview with Omura
     at Maui High.
     29.  On September 28, 1998, I met with Vance Yatsurshiro, Lahina Intermediate. After the
     meeting Yatsurshiro advises that he will in a letter to Kaumeheiwa have my name placed
     on the priority calling list.
     30.  A short time later I began to receive calls from the system to teach as a substitute teacher.
     31.  I would learn later that Lahina Intermediate had a particular reputation with regard to its
     treatment of substitute teachers. It was considered one of the more difficult, if not the
     most difficult places to be a substitute teacher. Additionally it is located in Lahina some
     forty to fifty minute drive from my home in Kihei. Virtually any other school in the
     system with the exceptions of the Hana schools would be closer to my location.
     32.   I was requested by Theresa Sakovitz to cover her position now at Maui High from
     October 16, 1998 to November 6, 1998. Teachers are able to contract the substitute of
     their choice through the automated call system. I accepted job number 375937 to teach
     Ms. Sakovitz’s class.
     33.  On the morning of October 16, 1998, I presented to Maui High School to teach. I was
     greeted with the admonishment that I would teach that day but that I was not to return for
     the rest of the multi day assignment.
     34.  This was my first assignment at Maui High and I found that Ms. Sakovitz’s class
     assignments were much different then the ones where I had previously sat in on. In the
     past Sakovitz was working directly with students know to have a problem with authority.
     In the current situation Sakovitz was really just a teaching aid with no particular
     responsibilities.  It became obvious to me that Sakovitz was assigned make work
     situations to keep her on the payroll but without any meaningful work to do. A time
     honored method incorporated in academia to drive out someone that is not wanted.
     35.  On March 9, 1999, I reported to Maui High to fill a substitute position per a request from
     the automated system. It was a Special Education class with no instructor named. It
     turned out that the full time regular teacher, Charles Moore, had quite the class some two
     weeks before. Subsequent substitute teachers had not been able to effectively deal with
     the situation and had chosen not to return. I worked the job until the school year ended in
     June of 1999. No effort was made to give me the level of compensation associated with
     being a long term substitute.
     36.  The following school year from fall 1999 to June 2000 I worked a variety of substitute
     position throughout the school system.
     37.  In the summer of 2000 I had business on the mainland and no need to work as a
     substitute or to collect unemployment compensation.
     38.  I continued to work for the DOE from fall 2000 to June 2001.
     39.  During the regular school year I learned about the unemployment system and how it was
     set up to assist teachers. During the strike for higher wages by the teachers I was able to
     apply for unemployment compensation and received same for the period when teachers
     were out.
     40.  In early June, 2001, I applied for unemployment for the summer session.
     41.  I was denied unemployment for the summer and filed an appeal of the decision on June
     21, 2001. Aware that I could not sustain my life without summer unemployment benefits
     on a substitute teacher salary I applied for a full time position with the Department of
     Education.
     42.  On June 28, 2001, I received a request from Bruce Shimomoto requesting a written
     explanation regarding my termination from Western Illinois University in 1991.
     43.  On July 3, 2001, I objected to the scheduled telephone hearing regarding my
     unemployment denial scheduled for July 16, 2001.
     44.  On or about July 6, 2001, I responded to Shimomoto’s request for information with a
     letter and copy of my book, He Wouldn’t Drink the Hemlock: The Firing of Dr.
     Leisure which explains in some detail the circumstances behind my firing from Western
     Illinois University in 1991.
     45.  On or about July 13, 2001 Shimomoto reports “This book more than adequately fulfills
     our request for your explanation regarding your termination at Western Illinois
     University.” However, the DOE now wants “an original copy of the termination notice
     from Western Illinois University.”
     46.  On July 16, 2001, I advise Shimomoto that “Unfortunately I am not in a position to
     supply you with such a document. All my records and other personal possessions were
     taken and disposed of by Virgil Mittelberg in September 2000.”
     47.  On July 17, 2001, I requested information from Paul LeMahieu regarding filing a class
     action suite over denied summer unemployment.
     48.  On or about July 19, 2001, Personnel Specialist Bruce Shimomoto requests that I provide
     documentation to be obtained from the university regarding my firing. “If these
     documents are available from the University, we ask that you request these documents
     and then forward them to us to review.”
     49.  On July 25, 2001, I request Western Illinois University to “Please send an `original copy`
     of termination notice from Western Illinois University.”
     50.   Letter dated August 16, 2001, from Superintendent LeMahieu is response to my letter
     requesting information on filing class action suite in behalf of substitute teachers being
     denied unemployment benefits for the summer.
     51.  On August 24, 2001, I am advised by appeals officer Ernest Hanaumi that the appeal for
     unemployment was denied because I failed to attend the scheduled hearing.
     52.  September 4, 2001, the Maui News reports that the DOE is short hundreds of teachers.
     “The number of vacant positions this school year could be as high as 437, he said a news
     conference Monday.”
     53.  Every year the DOE is short about four hundred teachers in the fall. This has been the
     case since I first became aware of it in 2001.
     54.  Eventually I came to realize that the annual fall shortage of teachers is a contrivance by
     the DOE so that they may continue to hire under qualified individuals at a lower pay rate
     than properly qualified individual. Because of the perceived shortage usual standards for
     employment are waved. Note that this “shortage” occurs every year.
     55.  On September 18, 2001, I request that the unemployment hearing be reopened by filing
     Application For Reopening since I had advised in writing of my request to reschedule
     in advance of hearing because I had a teaching commitment with the DOE..
     56.  On September 25, 2001, Ernest Hanaumi grants my request for the reopening of the
     unemployment appeal.
     57.  On November 5, 2001 I request “that subpoenas be issued for the following documents
     for use in the November 21, 20001 hearing....”
     58.  November 21, 2001, a hearing is held on unemployment by Judith Shamoto. The
     subpoenas are not approved by Shamoto and the material most relevant to the issue at
     hand is not available. At the hearing it becomes rather apparent that regardless of what I
     say the outcome will be a denial. I am told that I will receive a decision in a few weeks.
     59.  January 2002, I call the Department of Industrial Labor Relations to determine what has
     happened regarding the unemployment decision. I had thought that I may have missed it.
     The answer from the DILR is rather convoluted involving sickness, working part time
     etc. The bottom line is that a decision has not been made.
     60.  In later spring months of 2002, I make additional inquiries as to the status of the
     unemployment decision from the DILR by phone. The bottom line is that no decision has
     yet been made.
     61.  On or about April 16, 2002, I file a complaint with the Federal Equal Employment
     Opportunity Commission Enforcement Division regarding what I believe to be
     discriminatory conduct associated with the failure to employ me in the fall of 2001 as a
     full time teacher.
     62.  On July 1, 2002, I again file a claim for unemployment benefits for the summer of 2002.
     63.  On July 8, 2002, by letter, I demand a decision from the DIRL regarding my
     unemployment challenge of November 21, 2001.
     64.  In a few days I receive a letter dated July 10, 2002 from the DIRL in which Judith
     Shamoto issues her decision denying unemployment for this summer school teacher in
     2001. (Note this a full year from the time of the problem which relief is being sought.
     65.  On or about July 16, 2002, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued a
     Notice-of-Right-to-Sue-Letter which was dated July 1, 2002. Ninety days from date of
     letter is October 1, 2002 and ninety days from date received is October 16, 2002.  The
     EEOC reports that the DOE contents that the reason I have not been hired is that I did not
     complete the application process. That I did not provide the materials or explanation
     regarding my firing from WIU as required.
     66.  On or about July, 2002, I filed an appeal of the Agency Decision in the 2nd Circuit Court
     regarding the unemployment denial of benefits for the summer of 2001. The hearing on
     the matter is scheduled for October 2002.
     67.  In August 2002, when the unemployment benefits should kick back in regardless of the
     DOE’s misinterpretation of the unemployment rules I am advised that I am not eligible
     for benefits. The DILR views my failure to not sign and submit a document prepared by
     the DOE in March of 2002 as a voluntary quitting of my employment with the DOE. I
     file an appeal of the decision and the matter is ultimately scheduled for review in
     November 2002.
     68.  At the October hearing before Shackley R. Raffetto, attorney Steven K. Miyasaka will
     represent to the judge that the matter of summer unemployment benefits for substitute
     teachers has been adjudicated many times in the Hawaiian courts with the decisions in
     favor of the department. Interestingly, no such decisions are cited in the DOE’s filings
     and none will be cited in the subsequent filing to the Hawaiian Supreme Court of Judge
     Raffetto’s decision in support of the DOE.
     69.  Shortly after the decision of Judge Raffetto, I discussed with Robyn M. Kuwabe,
     (attorney for DILR) the matter of not wanting to pay substitute teachers unemployment in
     the summer and the idea that my position was in support of the general good in that it not
     only benefitted the substitute teachers but the whole education system as well. She
     rejected the idea and indicated that we obviously had different points of view and further
     discussion would be unproductive.
     70.  At the November 2002 hearings two issues are discussed. One the unemployment denial
     for summer 2002 and the subsequent denial of unemployment for the fall. The hearing
     officer upholds the DOE position regarding summer unemployment and I am denied
     benefits for the summer of 2002. I immediately filed for a hearing in the Circuit Court.
     On the issue of fall unemployment the hearing officer rules in my favor and I receive the
     benefits in November of 2002.
     71.  On December 3, 2002 I meet with Dr. Jeffrey Lin of the Community Clinic of Maui for
     an examination and suggestions on how to deal with depression. He advises treatment
     with behaviorist Kelley Aiyana. I sought the treatment in 2003.
     72.  January 8,2003, I meet with J. Afalla of the Department of Human Services and file a
     claim for general assistance. I am unable to work. I am suffering from depression and can
     not even fill out an employment application. I can not keep up with the lunacy of the
     Department of Education regarding their procedures associated with trying to maintain
     my employment.
     73.  On January 14, 2003 I meet with Dr. David Wittenberg. As a result of that meeting I am
     given general assistance which I have received from that time forward.
     74.  March 1, 2003 I meet with Kathleen M. McNamara for an examination related to my
     application for SSI. She is retained by the Discrimination Determination Branch.
     75.  April 14, 2003 meet with Richard M. Sword, Ph.D. Inc regarding depression and how to
     proceed with treatment and pursuing a workers compensation claim. Among other things
     he advises that the DOE is not very responsive to psychological related problems in the
     workman’s compensation area.
     76.  June 3, 2003 meet with Dr. Gayland D.K. Yee of the Kihei Wailea Medical Center for
     assistance in dealing with depression associated with working for DOE. Dr. Yee
     prescribes Effexor XR which I take for a short while but experience a side effect that
     precludes further use. Dr. Yee is the physician that gave me the physical required for
     initial employment with the DOE in March 12, 1998.
     77.  June 2003 I am evicted from my cottage on Noi Street because the owners wish to rent to
     family members. I am a few months behind on my rent since I failed to receive
     unemployment compensation during the previous summers and had no income. I had
     resided in the cottage from May 28,1999.
     78.  Earlier I had met with  Dr. Jeffrey Lin of the Community Clinic of Mau who
     recommended I see behaviorist Kelley Aiyana. She was not available and I subsequently
     meet with Stacy Krenelka, Behavioral Health Director for treatment  June 19 through
     August 12, 2003
     79.  Dr. Yee does not wish to take on a worker’s compensation claim and suggest I contact
     Jocelyn Chang, DO. She does not wish to take on such a claim at the time.
     80.  Pursuing my interest in the matter of unemployment benefit for substitute teachers in the
     summer I would make some interesting discoveries all of which come back to the central
     premise that many actions by the DOE are discriminatory and intended to protect a
     particular class at the expense of other classes of people.
     81.  Trying to search the case law in the Hawaii computerized data base for material related to
     the Department of Education and unemployment in particular, I found it extremely
     difficult to find material. The individual at the other end of the help line suggested it was
     really not possible to find by category material in the system. The number of cases
     against the DOE in particular were overwhelming and it was not possible to search by
     topic.
     82.  In my search of the Internet I would learn that a decision had been rendered regarding the
     payment of unemployment to substitutes for the summer in 1998 in the 3rd Circuit Court
     on the Big Island. Efforts to find this case took many months and much effort. The final
     results are what is of interest here. The case is 3CC97-0-000552 State of Hawaii
     Department of Education V.Kawamura, AdrienneY. , State of Hawaii Department of
     Labor. The attorney representing the Department of Labor is Robyn M. Kuwabe which is
     the same attorney representing the Department of Labor in my case. In this case the Dept
     of Labor prevailed against the Dept of Education and the ruling favored the payment of
     unemployment for substitute teachers in the summer.  Note that in all the proceedings
     regarding unemployment this case is trivialized and not cited or addressed in the
     proceedings.
     83.  It is interesting to note that the judge handling this case was forced out of her position as
     judge of the Circuit Court. I do not know if this was the reason but would not be
     surprised.
     84.  In a letter dated May 28, 2003, I would attempt to obtain a copy of the above case from
     Judge Terence Yoshioka. That effort was unsuccessful. Note that Judge Yoshioka is fully
     aware that I am a pauper and have no money. Yet this key document is withheld and not
     available for my case.
     85.  At the June 4, 2003, hearing in the 2nd Circuit Court before Joseph E. Cardoza the
     attorney for the DOE Steven K. Miyasaka continues to misrepresent the previous court
     rulings. Attorney Robyn M. Kuwabe does not appear and thus can not be questioned
     regarding the Big Island case. Judge Cardoza after hearing the statements from both sides
     advises that “he will let me know,” the decision to be delivered at some future time. (As
     of October 4, 2003 some four months later no decision has been issued.)
     86.  In the spring of 2003 I am advised that my unemployment claims have been denied for
     two separate weeks. The reason is the assertion that I posted “do not disturb” on the
     teacher calling system and thus was unavailable for work. A hearing on this matter is
     held in September. Since I screen all calls and never touch my phone I advise the DOE
     and the DILR representatives that such a situation is not possible.
     87.  The hearing officer rules that I must have posted the notice since I alone live at the
     address and access the phone. This is yet another example of where the DOE is pro active
     in its effort to dislodge an individual from the system. Interestingly the amount of money
     is about two hundred dollars and since I do not receive it for this week of unemployment
     I will receive it for a later week. No purpose is served other than to effectively harass me.
     88.  A recent case in the United States District Court which is most indicative of the process
     of discrimination engaged in by the Department of Education is Umar Rahsaan v. State of
     Hawaii, Department of Education Civil No. 00-00795 HG/LEK. This is a case of an
     African American male teacher who over a period of many years was systematically
     denied access to teaching particular courses which he should have had access according
     to contract. A reading of this case clearly shows the pervasiveness of the discrimination
     by Japanese descent individuals and the lengths they will go to maintain their hold and
     positions within the Hawaii Department of Education.
     89.  I feel that I have provided enough information on a full range of changing situations
     where things are created for the benefit of a selected group of people with no intent for
     following the letter of the law, resulting in racial discrimination against this Haole
     teacher.
     90.  The basic underlying problem associated with attempting to work for the DOE is the
     control and dominance by the Japanese descent individuals. These individuals are
     interested in maintaining and strengthening their position and power without regard to
     what should be the main mission of the Department of Education which should be the
     providing quality education for the children of Hawaii. It is no accident that the states
     education program ranks at the bottom of all fifty states. All efforts to bring a possitive
     imputes to the department are met with a fierce resistance.
     91.  The Felix Program: A Case in Point. The response of the DOE to the Federal Courts
     efforts to rectify the inequities of the DOE to handicapped students is another example of
     the willful actions of the DOE to circumvent out side influences. Numerous individuals
     were hired to bring the school system into compliance. Once that was achieved the new
     structure was disassembled and there was a complete return to the status quo before the
     decree.
     92.  That I have a disability associated with my involvement with the Department of
     Education is already well established and recognized by the State of Hawaii. I am
     currently receiving disability income from the Department of Human Services which
     began in mid 2003. My application for SSI is in process.
     93.  The Department of Education is the only employer I have worked for other than my self
     since I came to Hawaii to live in 1996. Most all the lawsuits that I am involved with are
     the consequences stemming from the denial of employment and workman’s
     compensation directly associated with my efforts to secure the benefits associated with
     my employment with the DOE.
     94.  The statements from the various doctors that I visited over the years formally document
     the progress of events and have been presented to the DOE.
     95.  Note that the doctors employed by the Department of Human Services have approved the
     payment of disability. They note that I can not work the thirty hours required for full time
     employment because of sleep disorders and other problems associated with my condition.
     (The overwhelming demands associated with pursuing the law suites listed below have
     made it impossible to function in a regular mode. Many nights I am awakened with ideas
     or thoughts associated with the actions. Since I usually do not sleep through the night I
     find it necessary to take naps throughout the day. It is not possible to function as a
     teacher and be awake and on my feet throughout the day. Right after lunch is a
     particularly difficult time.)
     96.  The issue is not whether I have a disability and who or where that it was developed, but
     rather the appropriate level of compensation that should be awarded and who should bear
     the cost, the DHS or the DOE.
     97.  The Distortions of Dr. Rogers   Rogers purposely and intentionally misrepresents Dr.
     Harker. Note that Dr. Rogers never looks at the various lawsuits filed by Dr. Harker but
     dismisses them out of hand without knowing what they are about or why they were filed.
     This misrepresentation is picked up by the director in making his decision
     98.  I believe Dr. Rogers is criminally negligent in his analysis and will make that case when
     this is appealed to the Circuit Court.
     99.  The DOE Dr. Rogers appears to have totally misunderstood the significance of my
     Registered Trade Mark of “Dr. Leisure” by suggesting that I have some
     Narcissistic/Antisocial Personality Disorder.  He apparently has no particular
     awareness of Aristotle and his contributions to western civilization.  After all it is
     Aristotle thoughts and belief system that gave rise to the words in the Declaration of
     Independence that “we hold these truths self evident that all men are created equal and
     entitled to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
     100. “But, if it were not for his underlying Narcissistic/Antisocial Personality Disorder, he
     would not have led an irresponsible and self-indulgent lifestyle to create the
     circumstances of his emotional distress in the first place.” Joseph P. Rogers, Ph.D. in
     Independent Psychological Evaluation of 1/28/04
     101. The real issue is Depression and Anxiety Stress Syndrome associated with my dealings
     with the DOE. It is a fact that if I had not become involved with the DOE and found other
     employment I would not have lost my property in Illinois and become homeless on Maui
     in August of 2003.
     102. The stress and depression stem directly from the numerous law suites that I have had to
     file in an effort to obtain just compensation due me and other substitute teachers from the
     DOE.
     103. Suite No 25615 in the Intermediate Court of Appeals. Deals with the failure to pay
     unemployment insurance benefits to unemployed substitute teachers in the summer. The
     fact is that the state paid unemployment benefits to substitute teachers from 1977 to 1997
     under the laws as they are currently published. In 1997 the DOE made a change in its
     interpretation of the law which was court tested by the Department of Labor. The
     Department of Labor prevailed and the Judge ruled that DOE must pay unemployment. I
     have been working on this matter since 2001.
     104. Harker v. Dept of Education, United States District Court Civil No. 02-00650 DAE-BMK
     This suite is over the DOE failure to complete the processing of my application for full
     time employment in the fall of 2001. The DOE asserts that I failed to complete the
     application process when in fact they are the ones that did not complete the process
     because of their discriminatory behavior. This suite was on Appeal to the 9th appellate
     court. Somehow the DOE was able to get my in pauperous status revoked and I have
     been unable to pursue this matter in the appellate court.
     105. Suite Civil 02-1-0521(3) deals with summer unemployment in 2002 and was taken to the
     Circuit Court. Judge Cordoza eventually ruled for the DOE. Since the matter is already
     before the Supreme Court it was not appealed.
     106. Suites Civil 03-1-0317(2) and 03-1-0319(1) deal with the denial of unemployment
     payments for a particular week. The reason for the denial is that the DOE has indicated
     that I posted a “due not disturb” message on my phone and thus was unavailable for
     work. The fact is that the DOE is the one that entered the codes necessary to make this
     change which they then attributed to me. It is but another example of the efforts that the
     DOE will go to prevent me from receiving unemployment benefits.
     107. Note that none of these matters are discussed in Dr. Rogers’ assessment of the causes of
     my depression and stress anxiety.
     108. Let us examine each response by Dr. Rogers, refer to Discussion in end of his report:
     109. 1) Roger’s knows the issue here is not specifically tied to one particular date but rather to
     a series of events which he does not even address.
     110. 2) It is doubtful that Harker’s pre-existing Narcissistic/Antisocial Personality Disorder
     had anything to do with the DOE’s efforts to deny substitute teachers unemployment in
     the summer after they have done so for twenty years from 1977 to 1997 under existing
     law. The matter was court tested in 1997 with the Dept. of Labor successful in court that
     the DOE must pay. It is more likely that the concerted efforts by the DOE to deprive
     substitute teachers with a livelihood has more to do with the depression and stress anxiety
     syndrome manifest by Dr. Harker.
     111. This combined with the blocking of his efforts to obtain full time employment when it is
     apparent that he can not sustain himself with the money from substitute teaching as
     administered by the DOE.
     112. 3) There is a high correlation between the claimant’s condition and actual dates of
     employment with the DOE.
     113. 4) Harker sought employment with the DOE because of financial needs. The financial
     implications of employment as a substitute teacher have been severely hindered by the
     actions of the DOE to deny unemployment benefits to substitute teachers for the summer
     months.
     114. 5) The record shows that what ever Harker’s pre-existing psychiatric/psychological
     condition he was not manifesting the depression and stress anxiety syndrome prior to his
     involvement with the DOE in any significant way. After his encounter with the DOE the
     psychiatric/psychological problems became such that he sought professional help from
     numerous sources. The reports from those doctors never mention any reference to
     “Narcissistic/Antisocial Personality Disorder.”
     115. 6) The problem may be temporary. It the casual agent can be removed from the equation
     Dr. Harker may be able to get on with his life. In other words if he does not have to deal
     with the DOE.
     116. 7) Pre injury status can never be achieved.
     117. 8) Harker has never not taken responsibility for himself and will continue to do so in the
     future as long as he is physically and mentally able.
     118. 9) Harker is not able to properly access the nature of the impairments associated with this
     injury.
     119. 10) Harker’s experience is that periods of depression increase and the stress anxiety
     syndrome manifest itself when trying to deal with the DOE. Such matters as filing out the
     requisite forms to be employed by the DOE have become undoable. The fact is that any
     dealing with the DOE is untenable. Harker can not ever work for the DOE as it is
     presently configured and continues to interpret policy in a manner that is detrimental to
     the teachers and students of Hawaii.
     120. 11) The doctors associated with the Department of Human Services have made
     recommendations for continuing psychiatric/psychological treatment. Those
     recommendations are being followed at this time.
     121. 12) Dr. Harker’s life is moving forward with or without the resolution of this workers
     compensation claim. Dr. Harker is currently receiving compensation and treatment
     courtesy of the state of Hawaii.  That is Harker’s only source of income. Recognition of
     the financial implications of this claim and there being applied to the DOE would be a
     more just disbursement of state funds. The cost would be attributed to the agency
     responsible for the problem.
     122. The lawsuits and challenges more likely stem from Dr. Harker’s blood line and not any
     failure to take responsibility for his actions.
     123. Dr. Harker’s blood line includes, but is not limited to such individuals as Edward I, John
     Lackland, Henry I, Henry II, and Henry III and William the Conquer (all kings of
     England). The line can be traced back to Charlemagne King of the Franks around 800.
     Recent material presented in Lawrence Gardner’s Bloodline of the Holly Grail
     establishes the relationship between Jesus Christ and Charlemagne. Based on this
     material it can be suggested that Dr. Harker’s 57th great grandfather is Jesus Christ.
     124. Conclusions and Recommendations: Obtaining employment with the Department of
     Education as a substitute teacher appeared in 1998 as the most direct means to obtain
     enough of an income to reside on Maui. As it turned out the experience lead directly to
     the loss of everything that I owned. The failure of the DOE to pay unemployment to
     substitute teacher ( a reversal of a twenty year policy of paying unemployment that ended
     in 1997)  was the catalyst for creating the environment that has lead to my mental illness.
     125. Maureen Susuki who handles the workers comp claims really best summarizes the
     inherent problems with the DOE. She asserted that she did not recognize mental illness
     but rather had to see tangible evidence of an injury. An axe imbedded within one’s skull
     might make the case for a tangible injury but short of that nothing else would do. She
     took pride in her lack of reading and familiarity with literature or any written material be
     it fiction or non-fiction. This woman is functionally illiterate for her position with the
     DOE. Regrettably she is not unique and probably is a good indication of why the Hawaii
     Education results are so poor.
     126. Dr. Roger’s is another example of someone lacking in much sophistication regarding the
     nature of depression and other psychological conditions. In spite of assessments and
     treatments by a number of doctors and a total disregard for the significance of the various
     law suites being pursued in the interest of rectifying perceived wrongs within the DOE,
     Roger’s suggest that Harker’s behavior is a pre-existing antisocial narcissistic behavior.
     Even a cursory look at Harker’s training and academic expertise suggest a much more
     sophisticated individual. It really is not surprising that recently discovered material
     establishes a linage that can be traced to the historical Jesus Christ with direct
     descendants including a number of kings of England and Europe.
     127. The level of disability is clearly a hundred percent. It was in 2003, that I was no longer
     able to work for the DOE or in fact anyone else. I was unable to cope with the application
     process and was not really suited for employment as a waiter or sales clerk. I had been an
     educator all my life and that is what I did. End of Story. I decided to take early Social
     Security because it had become impossible to work.
     128. The level of compensation should be based on if I was a full time teacher. The DOE
     should have given me a compensation package commensurate to that when I took on the
     long term teaching assignment at Maui High School on March 9, 1999. That assignment
     lasted seven or eight weeks.
     129. I had another assignment where I taught the first six weeks for an instructor at Lahina
     Intermediate who had a hysterectomy. I am not certain of the dates and it may have been
     July 2002.
     130. I should have been hired as a full time teacher when I applied in the fall of 2001. This
     also would be a fair basis on which to establish a level of compensation.
     131. As a result of trying to work for the Department of Education I have lost everything I
     own. Prior to my obtaining early Social Security my entire income has been derived from
     the State of Hawaii through the Department of Human Services.
     132. It is simply a matter of which account should bear the burden of the cost of sustaining
     me. It would be far more equitable if the cost of my support was born by the DOE since
     this is the agency with whom I worked and gave my all over the last few years of my
     productive life.
     133. Based on my experience with the DOE I am not expecting a favorable determination on
     this issue and will pursue this matter in the Circuit Court. This document and the
     subsequent law suite will be reported on my web site DrLeisure.com so that others might
     become aware of the inherent problems with the Hawaii Department of Education.

FURTHER DECLARANT SAYETH NAUGHT
 

 DR. GEORGE R. HARKER
 Kihei, HI  November 30, 2005
 

Special Offer: Both He Wouldn't Drink the Hemlock and Mostly True Life Adventures of Dr. Leisure for price of one $23.99 plus shipping ($3.50) Click the paypal button:

  Both for price of one!