An SOW is not an MSA

On the last day of testimony at trial when they knew we were winning, AARP tried to once again change the reason for my termination. Their attorney tried to say the Statement of Work (SOW) which was under a Master Services Agreement (MSA), was a contract I was negotiating. Because of this, I violated the Code of Conduct – this is 100% FALSE. AARP is very structured on how they handle MSA’s. They are 100% Handled and Negotiated by Procurement! In the Fall of 2017, Sue Lilly from procurement contacted me to say that it was time to renegotiate the Source MSA. There were several meetings to discuss and because of the inventory management system and other work Source was doing, we could not turn on a dime and end the relationship if they didn’t win the Request for Pricing. Procurement agreed to wait until 2018 to do the new agreement and we would continue under the current MSA PROCUREMENT had negotiated and signed in 2015, it is here in the email string below. This is proof I was NOT negotiating a contract, but reader you know that truth doesn't matter to them - WINNING DOES and trying to continue to paint me as a liar and apparently also make sure everyone knows I am not a lawyer . . . .I should point out I worked at AARP for 11 years and negotiated many, many contracts - while I am not a lawyer I know what a contract looks like, it was part of my job. One does not need to be a lawyer to negotiate a contract and I was NOT negotiating a contract with Source Marketing, as I have said, that was Procurements job.

One of my AMAZING attorney's didn't let her get away with it! It is why its so important to have the correct lawyers who know their stuff and most importantly- fight for you!

The email string with procurement - and know at any time AARP could have brought someone from procurement to verify what they were claiming to be true - they didn't because it was NOT TRUE. Note that the Procurement Manager says - "As long as WE can take this to market for RFP for the 2019 services." WE meaning Procurement.

Now, in 2024 AARP’s attorney tried to confuse the jury and say I broke the rules by going to dinner and a show with Source because I was in “contract negotiations." Remember, I was fired for the trip to New York and New Orleans in February 2018 and at no time did anyone say to me or provide documentation during my firing or discovery that stated it was because I was negotiating a contract with Source Marketing – this came up 6 years later on the last day of trial. It was after we proved over and over that I did nothing different from my straight co-workers and AARP discriminated against me and I was illegally and discriminatorily fired. Again, the shifting reasons for my termination point directly to the fact that I was discriminated against. If I had been properly terminated, there would be no reason to keep changing the narrative.

On February 22, 2018 I was fired for violating the Code of Conduct:

As they continually lost, AARP kept changing the narrative that I was fired because:

1. I am a liar, I am gay so. . . .

2. I was negotiating a contract and should not have gone to dinner and a show

3. My business trip to New York was personal because I went to see a doctor during what would have been my lunch hour

So many other reasons for my termination other than the TRUTH! I was targeted and discriminatorily fired because I am gay.