one for PBA

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

Hate to break it down for you but PBA had nothing, nothing to do with this. The DS rescinded the action against BB. From what I understand, he does not feel that there is anything wrong with anyone sending an email to employees critizing the agency, the divison, the bureau, its administration, employees or you. So everyone now can do this instead of using an anonymous message board. In fact, all employees throughout the universe should start sending emails be critical of their employers too! I bet that would be some good reading. Oh, nevermind, I forgot, employers do not allow there employees to "shout out," and act like this without action, only DBPR does. Back to the message, PBA who?! I to have known BB since he has been employed here, he is not a bad (or great) guy he just runs off at the mouth a little to much except for the past year that paper closed it somewhat. Hopefully BB has learned a lesson with his mouth and understands not all employers are as carefree and forgiving as the current DS.

I agree, ole BB has been silent the last year and a half. Maybe his rudness and lack of respect for others is a thing in his past. I hope he truly appreciates the "favor" the DS has done for him and he does not return to his old tricks and ways. I must admit it mellowed him. BB you know when to keep that mouth closed and you must remain respectful to others. Dont burn another bridge.

Hi everyone. If you have received discipline during your career, you need to request to have it rescinded. If it is not rescinded, file a complaint with Human Resources on the grounds that past discipline has been rescinded for some folks and being they have rescinded it for some they need to rescind it for all.

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

BA,aka Miss Thang, we thought you stopped posting?! :shock: :shock: :shock:

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

BA,aka Miss Thang, we thought you stopped posting?! :shock: :shock: :shock:


BA did not make this post. This is a copy of a e-mail she sent out to people on her mailing list. I believe she just wanted to spread some good news for a change. It's said you have to use it a some weird personal slam. My mistake I thought because it came from her, the PBA was responsible. I have since found out that's not the case, it was all Drago. If you read what she wrote, she never credited the PBA, just Drago.

ok - right?! :wink:

I cant say I am surprised with BA switching statements, but I clearly remember our conversation after BB sent us that email, she was one of many saying BB mouth finally got him in trouble, "he found one that was not going to take his disrespect," and that BB had "crossed the line this time" and should not have been disresptful to the "new Director." Amazing how time can change ones mind. I guess now I agree with the other post, which face is talking? and which one will be talking next week?!

When you guys get it wrong - you get it really wrong! Sad. :(

Very sad, it amazes me the trivial bu** sh** you all come up with. For Christ sakes, be happy for the man, at least he stood up for what he thought was right, which is a lot less then I can say for most of you on this board. AMAZING !!!

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

Hey "WhatPBAwho?," it seems as though that you might know who the weasel was that turned on BB by informing the former director about the e-mail. Although BB may be a bit critical, I think that if a person uses an outside source to disseminate information to other concerned individuals (i.e. personal email to other personal emails, not department/agency email), then the person has the right to say what the person wants to say. I'm sure you've said some not-so-nice things about the agency and your co-workers also. Just for your information, Freedom of speech is the concept of being able to speak freely without censorship. The new directors clearly agreed with this, and that is why BB won his grievance. I think the former director's ego was crushed after he learned about the email. Therefore, the former director took a cheap and unjustified shot at BB to get him back and to ward off any BB clones. The punishment would have been justified if BB violated policy by utilizing the company's email, but that was not the case.

Since you don't see what the former director did wrong, I am going to try to illustrate this incident for you: A citizen (in this case BB) walked pass a police officer (in this case, the former director). The citizen stated out loud, "That is a fat and ugly cop!" Well the cop gets mad and decides to arrest the citizen on a trumped up charge. The citizen goes to jail for 2 weeks and when he is discharged, he files a formal complaint on the officer for False Arrest. An internal investigation is conducted and the disposition indicates that the officer did not have probable cause for the arrest. The officer is then deemed incompetent and de-certified.

Like an earlier guest stated, at least BB is not afraid to take a stand. I have to respect the man for this!


Hate to break it down for you but PBA had nothing, nothing to do with this. The DS rescinded the action against BB. From what I understand, he does not feel that there is anything wrong with anyone sending an email to employees critizing the agency, the divison, the bureau, its administration, employees or you. So everyone now can do this instead of using an anonymous message board. In fact, all employees throughout the universe should start sending emails be critical of their employers too! I bet that would be some good reading. Oh, nevermind, I forgot, employers do not allow there employees to "shout out," and act like this without action, only DBPR does. Back to the message, PBA who?! I to have known BB since he has been employed here, he is not a bad (or great) guy he just runs off at the mouth a little to much except for the past year that paper closed it somewhat. Hopefully BB has learned a lesson with his mouth and understands not all employers are as carefree and forgiving as the current DS.

It is obvious that we have several that need to learn the law as PBA will tell you the same. First, private employees have no Freedom of Speech (1st Amed.) protection against their private employer therefore the 1st Amed. does not apply and second, public employees have very limited speech rights against their public employer that is why the Whistle Blower Act was created. As the US Supreme Court ruled, a public employer can discipline a public employee up to dismissal for speaking out and against the employer as it is deemed insubordination and conduct unbecoming. The court indicated that if employees were allowed to speak openly and freely against the employer such could have a negative impact on the work, office, other employees and morale, and should not be tolerated as the employer retains the right to operate the office in an efficient manner. The court entered one exception: The only time a public employee's free speech might be protected is when it is made as a private citizen and the issue is of "public concern." This exception must be tested (difficult) before it is entered as such. Do your research before you attempt to quote the law, esp. the 1st Admendment, as it relates to employment. Verify it for yourself the info is free and available on line.

It is obvious that we have several that need to learn the law as PBA will tell you the same. First, private employees have no Freedom of Speech (1st Amed.) protection against their private employer therefore the 1st Amed. does not apply and second, public employees have very limited speech rights against their public employer that is why the Whistle Blower Act was created. As the US Supreme Court ruled, a public employer can discipline a public employee up to dismissal for speaking out and against the employer as it is deemed insubordination and conduct unbecoming. The court indicated that if employees were allowed to speak openly and freely against the employer such could have a negative impact on the work, office, other employees and morale, and should not be tolerated as the employer retains the right to operate the office in an efficient manner. The court entered one exception: The only time a public employee's free speech might be protected is when it is made as a private citizen and the issue is of "public concern." This exception must be tested (difficult) before it is entered as such. Do your research before you attempt to quote the law, esp. the 1st Admendment, as it relates to employment. Verify it for yourself the info is free and available on line.

Thank you for that information. You certainly enlightened me. It sounds like that your legal prowess far exceeds the confines and limitations of this agency. I'll be honest, I simply can't do any better for myself yet. I have an AA degree and I'm working on higher degrees to get towards your level so that I can go higher in life.

What's your excuse? You seem to be a misfit in this agency with the kind of knowledge that you can readily produce.

Are you still here because you secretly can't do any better and you would not shine bright enough or cut the muster in the world that you want others to believe that you belong in? Or, are you just complacent and you don't want any better in life? If I had to guess, I would bet it is the former rather than the latter because I don't believe that you acquired all that knowledge to be the best that you could be at the FDABT! :oops:

Hey on lighter note, let's be friends. Did you like my illustration at all?
If you thought my illustration sucked, help me out from the legal standpoints so that I can have more accurate depictions in my future posts. We can have a buddy system!

Thanks ole buddy ole pal :evil:

Guset 16: actually your illustration depicts BB as a private citizen, which he is not and was not acting as such when he emailed the 60+ employees. I will admit I do not know all the particulars, but I did receive the email and found it offensive, and typical BB...disrespectful. As you know BB attended an office meeting in Tampa, which was conducted by the then "new" director. After the meeting, BB emailed his thoughts and views on the meeting and the new director (some negative, some misleading) to over 60 employees throughout the state. BB was later disciplined for insubordination or conduct unbecoming or both, I do not really know. The email was sent from his personal computer using his private email, but BB was not acting as a private citizen (remember, he attended the meeting as a public employee), and he was not distibuting information of "public concern," but rather as an employee distributing information on and/or about an employer's meeting to other employees. I know BB and I know what his motive and intent was. He knows his motive and intent too, and knew it each time he entered each of the 60+ names. Now, with that said, many folks to inlcude him thought his "freedom of speech" would protect him, which brings us back to the law. It does not, and as public employees we are limited on our freedom to speak about our employer and that is why IUPA/PBA did not "jump" on this issue. In fact, PBA actually published an article warning public employees to be careful as their free speech is very limited. Call them (Hal Johnson), they will tell you. Or read it yourself on line.

I will close with this thought. Common sense should tell everyone if employees were allowed to openly and freely speak against their employers (to include supervisors), their missions, goals, objectives and assignments, where would all the businesses and public employers be today?! And, as one supreme court justice said to "sum it up," even if the employee retained 1st Amendment rights against their employer, which they do not, it would not preclude the employer from taking action against the employee to include dismissing the employee from their job.

Now, if DS Drago or better yet Secretary Benson has a meeting, and BB or any other employee does the same to them, do you think the employee will remain employed or remain discipline free?! I mean put the pieces together here there is always motive for ones action and Drago is no exception. I am not on a cursade, and frankly do not care because this will never impact me, but it is clear alot of employees think they have 1st Amendment protection and they do not, so chose what you say and when you say it. Bottom line remain professional.

Thanks for the compliments (I guess), and we are friends. I am employed here and remain because I chose to. I have no issues. It is a very simple job. The only issue I see is with the malcontents, and we have to deal with them because the brass either chooses not to or does not know how to.

Guset 16: actually your illustration depicts BB as a private citizen, which he is not and was not acting as such when he emailed the 60+ employees. I will admit I do not know all the particulars, but I did receive the email and found it offensive, and typical BB...disrespectful. As you know BB attended an office meeting in Tampa, which was conducted by the then "new" director. After the meeting, BB emailed his thoughts and views on the meeting and the new director (some negative, some misleading) to over 60 employees throughout the state. BB was later disciplined for insubordination or conduct unbecoming or both, I do not really know. The email was sent from his personal computer using his private email, but BB was not acting as a private citizen (remember, he attended the meeting as a public employee), and he was not distibuting information of "public concern," but rather as an employee distributing information on and/or about an employer's meeting to other employees. I know BB and I know what his motive and intent was. He knows his motive and intent too, and knew it each time he entered each of the 60+ names. Now, with that said, many folks to inlcude him thought his "freedom of speech" would protect him, which brings us back to the law. It does not, and as public employees we are limited on our freedom to speak about our employer and that is why IUPA/PBA did not "jump" on this issue. In fact, PBA actually published an article warning public employees to be careful as their free speech is very limited. Call them (Hal Johnson), they will tell you. Or read it yourself on line.

I will close with this thought. Common sense should tell everyone if employees were allowed to openly and freely speak against their employers (to include supervisors), their missions, goals, objectives and assignments, where would all the businesses and public employers be today?! And, as one supreme court justice said to "sum it up," even if the employee retained 1st Amendment rights against their employer, which they do not, it would not preclude the employer from taking action against the employee to include dismissing the employee from their job.

Now, if DS Drago or better yet Secretary Benson has a meeting, and BB or any other employee does the same to them, do you think the employee will remain employed or remain discipline free?! I mean put the pieces together here there is always motive for ones action and Drago is no exception. I am not on a cursade, and frankly do not care because this will never impact me, but it is clear alot of employees think they have 1st Amendment protection and they do not, so chose what you say and when you say it. Bottom line remain professional.

Thanks for the compliments (I guess), and we are friends. I am employed here and remain because I chose to. I have no issues. It is a very simple job. The only issue I see is with the malcontents, and we have to deal with them because the brass either chooses not to or does not know how to.

That was well put. I apologize if I confused you about complimenting you. I can be a jerk at times, but I am not being facetious when I say that you are a wealth of knowledge. As you probably know, you are an exception because the consensus is that we as officers believe that we have rights that are guaranteed under the constitution (although limited) just like everyone else. The knowledge that you have probably took some digging to find because it is not taught on the minimal level.

Shame on me, I just know what's ordinary and you know what is extraordinary; congratulations on your defeat, and I will bow down gracefully! So with that said, instead of downplaying the educational level of the average ABT agent, take the initiative to teach us what you know, or at least tell us where to find the information. That would be teamwork and teamwork is an intricate part of professionalism. This is just one issue and I'll do my own research to verify the information that you provided today. However, there are several issues that you probably have knowledge about that would help your fellow co-workers (to include the brass).

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

This great news

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

Why would this excuse for an agency have an SRT team? For what, counting tables and chairs, checking an ice machine etc...

Good news....no GREAT NEWS!! Bryan Brummett has had his 20 day suspension rescinded. He met with Deputy Secretary Drago and today and was given the news. Bryan has also been restored to the SRT team. Hopefully before much time passes he will get his money back, including the money he had to pay to keep his insurance in force. This is very encouraging news, maybe things are going to start getting better.

Congratulations Bryan, we've all be pulling for you! You've stayed the course and it has paid off finally.

Be Safe,

Why would this excuse for an agency have an SRT team? For what, counting tables and chairs, checking an ice machine etc...

Guess you've never worked south Florida. But you're right, the agency sucks but it wasn't always like it is today.

I fear a few of you may actually be mentally challenged. This thread started in 2007!!!