[Trigger Warning: I don’t do trigger warnings (yet).]
Well, congratulations, your evil plot to destroy me for being autistic is working. Remember that dream job I found miraculously last October? The one that made my family and me feel like we had dodged your bullets? The one that was absolutely perfect for me — perfect both for my autistic limitations and my technical skills; perfect because the company is in fact one of the more autism-friendly companies out there, so much so that it even has a program that creates jobs for autistic people?
Well, they just fired me for being autistic, and it’s mostly your fault. You see, Fritz, because you lied [your fault] to the EEOC investigators about why MetLife really fired me, and because the investigators subsequently just believed [their fault] your lies and dropped my charge instead of doing a real investigation [because their boss is your former Seyfarth Shaw colleague Victoria A. Lipnic, Donald Trump’s acting Chair of the EEOC], and because of your own dangerous ignorance and confusion [your fault] regarding autism and no doubt all psychiatric disabilities, I have found it utterly impossible to move past the gang rape you orchestrated and inflicted upon me [and indirectly my family — my children! — since their well-being depends heavily on my own, which you and your fellow rapists stole from us].
Obviously, the people who just fired me are also partly to blame, but it’s mostly because I am still obsessing autistically about that goddamn gang rape. Yes, yes, the “gang rape” that was “only” a “gang rape” in some purely figurative or metaphorical sense; the “so-called” gang rape you all managed to carry out with extreme politeness, with no physical contact whatsoever, and in fact almost entirely in writing! But again, from my perspective, this distinction between gang rape in a “merely figurative” sense, and actual gang rape in the old-school prison-shower sense has been far less useful for me than it has been for you and your fellow gang rapists at MetLife and the EEOC.
Figurative or not, it was a total mind-fuck of an ordeal, and it’s still fucking with my mind and the minds of pretty much everybody who cares about me.
To summarize briefly: I began working at my dream job in late October (2017) and everything started off wonderfully. It was like my family and I had won the lottery. I actually started to lose interest in you, MetLife, and what you had all done to us. I even considered withdrawing my EEOC charge against MetLife, but I was stopped by the idea that doing so would leave you all free to do again to others what you did to us. But by the middle of November, six months had passed since I filed the charge, so I reached out to the EEOC investigators to see if any progress had been made and they sent me that libelous tall tale you wrote for them instead of a legitimate EEOC position statement. When they then turned around and believed your lies, dropping the case and issuing me one of their so-called “Right to Sue” letters, a.k.a. the “Right to risk total bankruptcy by trying to sue a billion-dollar, global multi-national insurance company, that’s when I began to lose my marbles.
But at first not so bad that I wasn’t able to work. At first I was able to compartmentalize well enough to get my work done, but as the weeks passed my job performance began to suffer, and then back in March I could see that I was headed toward complete meltdown again, so I reached out to my doctor to see if she could help me get my head under control with meds. The good news is that she actually succeeded in doing just that, but it took several weeks, and in the meantime I continued to botch things on the job. So then about a month ago I started calling in sick. At first one day, then the next, and the next, until more than two full weeks had passed. Then finally when I was able to get back to work, they fired me under that hackneyed pretext companies always use when they want to fire someone illegally without getting caught, “…we’ve decided to go in a different direction with this role.”
Holy shit, man, is there anybody that is still actually fooled by this nonsense? I seriously doubt it. Somehow we have accidentally gone and built a civilization where it is paradoxically legal to fire people illegally. All you have to do to enter that particular Twilight Zone is utter the magic words “the company has decided to go in a different direction with the role”. Somehow a sentence like that is all that is required to undo 50 some-odd years of Civil Rights legislation. Let’s soap-box that:
Corporate America’s naked emperor.
HEY, CORPORATE AMERICA, YOU’RE NOT FOOLING ANYONE ANYMORE WITH THIS “GOING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION” BULLSHIT! YOUR EMPEROR IS NAKED!
Fritz, you need to tell your clients to stop using this pretext — especially if they’re not actually using it as an excuse to fire someone illegally. Sure, I get it, sometimes a company really does have to make changes and lay people off. But especially in that kind of situation they should never, ever blame the layoff on those changes. Why? Because when they do that, they provide cover for the bad guys — the companies that do fire people illegally and by using the same pretext.
Anyway, I figured you might like to know you have competition now — some new company vying for my attention. I won’t forget about you, though. No, you and I still have work to do together, but my thought furnace is only so big. To the extent that it is cooking one problem, it’s just not available to cook another.
And for now, my thought furnace is cooking this new problem.
Daniel L. Scholten, a.k.a. “The Walrus”
 I don’t believe I have written yet about this on this blog. I did, however, tell Fritz about it in private emails I’ve sent to him. Also, so as not to balloon the text of this letter unnecessarily, I don’t explain that the position was actually a 1 year contract with the company in question, and that I had been recruited for the position by a well-known independent consulting firm. So I was not actually a full-time employee, but was in fact a consultant working for the consulting firm. These details, however, are mostly irrelevant to the events being discussed in the letter. There is another simplification that I make regarding the events in question, explained in footnote .
 That’s actually the short version of what happened. The long version is that while I was out on leave, I began to feel self-conscious about all the time I was taking, so I promised my employer that if I didn’t pull it together soon, I would resign and allow them to find a replacement. I did that to reassure them, thinking that my new medications would take-effect and I wouldn’t have to resign. But 5 days later, when they still hadn’t really kicked in yet, I decided to make good on my promise and resign. But then a few days after that they did start to work, so I quickly told by employer and asked if I could come back to work, which is when I was given the “going in a different direction” pretext. So, yes, I didn’t actually get fired, per se, but I resigned on good terms with them (or so I thought), they hadn’t yet filled my position, I was ready, willing, and able to work, I asked to come back, and suddenly out of the blue they’re “going in a different direction” with the job.
I call bullshit. The fact that I resigned is irrelevant. I resigned on good terms, am ready to return to work, and now the company won’t take me back. Why? Because they’re “going in a different direction with the role”? Is there anyone who actually buys that nonsense?
I know I don’t.