August-October 2018: New False Allegations
On the 27.07.2018 I got the clear request from manager TM to build up a bench with performances comparable to the old bench to measure the SNR and DC measurements.
I rushed to do the work in only 3 weeks, with a lot of filters to be designed and hand-made. There wasn’t almost any documentation leftthe of the old test bench.
At the end of the 3 weeks (middle of August 2018) the test bench is validated, validation files and comparison between old and new test bench stored in the project folder, reported in team meeting and project meeting. No complaint from any side.
Back from my vacation, middle of September 2018, manager TM in a 1:1 meeting claim the bench is not working and wasn’t working when I left for vacation. Despite the evidence of the measurements.
To notice, manager TM never mentioned it in a team meeting or in a project meeting, because is evidently an invented claim. Anyone can see that the bench is running and is delivering perfect measurements.
The test bench has been running for the complete verification campaign, without any complaint from the colleagues who are evaluating the measurements. Only a single not reproducible fail on thousands of run.
In the 1:1 meeting manager TM says that he requested an “identical” bench, not a bench with “comparable performances”. This fake will be repeated in the brief to the court. The email with the original request is enough of a proof of the fake.
In the 1:1 meeting manager TM complains, among others, that the length of the cables between the 2 benches is different! The measurement procedure is self-calibrating, therefore 1 or 1.5 mt cables make no difference.
Manager TM complains that the cables are hanging! Correct read. I let manager TM notice that cables hang for gravity.
Other complaints of manager TM:
- I used a different RF routing, therefore my bench wasn’t working. A FAKE. I sent manager TM the Matlab code where the software handles the different bench, this is also committed in the central server. They ignored it and presented anyway the fact to the court, in the hope the court will not prove it (they can’t of course).
- cables are not labeled. Anyone knows that cables in test benches are not labeled. Intel presented this fact as a big lack to the court. I have a picture of the original bench, where cables are not labeled. FAKE.
- filters don’t have EMC shields. Measurements show that there is no need for EMC filters.
- I didn’t leave instruction to the colleagues how to run the bench. We use all the same files, therefore there is no need to leave instruction.
- The colleagues EC and AM weren’t able to run the bench, and they have to wait for colleague SP to run the bench. The story will be changed by Intel, you can read it in the next post. Again a fake.
The company will use these (together with the other false allegations) to fire me. You’ll read in more details in a next page.
On the 21st of October 2018, I had again a meeting with manager TM, he was repeating all the fakes. It was a strategic provocation meeting where your manager tries to let you lose your nerves. He was successful, I got nervous hearing all the fakes coming from Intel manager TM.
At some point I decided to leave the meeting room, I went to the lab, manager TM was following me very close in the walk from the meeting room to the lab, I entered the lab, I didn’t keep the door open for him.
The claim of manager TM: I slapped the door in front of him. Only thanks to his prompt reflex, he escaped serious injury. An injury would have been an evidence, on the contrary he doesn’t have any evidence. And he doesn’t have any witness.
The internal security camera right in front of the door wasn’t recording. Therefore a possible so important evidence is missing, what serendipity!
Leave a Reply