Phil Cannella Lawsuit: Phil Cannella was at the focal point of many industry changing events a few years ago. After a forty year career as a leading insurance professional, Phil Cannella was at the heart of influencing some significant industry reforms that would benefit all retirees and those approaching retirement.
Phil Cannella Lawsuit: Phil Cannella, in his no holds barred fashion, was bringing truth to the American retiree day in and day out through his media company, Retirement Media Inc. He was headline news and was quickly becoming a household name as a thought leader inspiring change in the financial services industry. Working in an industry that is rife with corruption where large investment banks control the order of the day and can influence the markets beyond the control of the everyday investor, Phil Cannella sought to change the way things were being done.
Phil Cannella Lawsuit: After Phil Cannella devised the Crash Proof Retirement system, his business expanded ten-fold. And it did so because his financial system was based on common sense. It was based on logic. It was based on truth rather than lies. The crux of his Crash Proof Retirement system focused on the individual in his or her retirement phase of life having a means of protecting their nest egg against market losses while still seeing and enjoying some of the gains. Sounding almost too good to be true, people were lining up in droves to hear Phil Cannella speak and provide his wisdom and education.
Phil Cannella Lawsuit: It goes without saying that people in the securities industry who were suddenly losing large market share to Phil were envious and sought to do anything to tear him down. Considering the fact that he had taken hundreds of millions of dollars of investor’s assets out of the securities industry and into the safe haven of the insurance industry it should come as no surprise that these people would carry out actions no matter how sordid to try to destroy Phil Cannella and his business.
First they did so through an explosive Internet defamation campaign which was uniquely designed to destroy his reputation online. Attracting numerous competitors who were all losing market share to Phil Cannella, they banded together to publish all manner of defamatory material about Phil and his business all with the intent to destroy his hard earned reputation. By painting such a picture they knew that potential customers would Google Phil’s name and after seeing such lies and defamation on the Internet, in its sheer volume, they would think twice about doing business with him.
As these competitors all posted under fictitious screen names and used multiple identities to post under, it appeared that there were a lot of consumers complaining yet the real facts were that this was all a façade. After years of such a defamation attack, which had been gaining momentum for some time, came a cropper after a federal court ordered that the defamatory material be removed from the Internet, these criminals sought another means to effect the same end.
They attracted within their ranks some former employees and sought to get them to file frivolous discrimination and harassment complaints. Knowing that this would not only tie up Phil Cannella’s financial resources and his time, they were also well aware that this could serve as new fodder for a new Internet Defamation campaign which they figured would be protected because it would have the credibility of being backed up with pseudo-court documents.
To that end, a former employee filed a discrimination claim based on numerous quite astounding allegations. This complaint was filed with the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) and the PHRC (Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission) who were tasked with investigating the claims. These federal and state entities are responsible for investigating such employment abuses:
“The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, or PHRC, enforces state laws that prohibit discrimination: the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, which covers discrimination in employment, housing, commercial property, education and public accommodations; and the Pennsylvania Fair Educational Opportunities Act, which is specific to postsecondary education and secondary vocational and trade schools.”
“In general, the law prohibits discrimination based on race; color; religious creed; ancestry; age (40 and over); sex; national origin; familial status (only in housing); handicap or disability and the use, handling or training of support or guide animals for disability. Retaliation for filing a complaint, opposing unlawful behavior or assisting investigations is also illegal.”
“PHRC also investigates employment discrimination complaints on behalf of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, and housing discrimination complaints on behalf of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD. These partnerships protect the rights of complainants under both state and federal law.”
“The law also empowers the commission to educate the general public, law enforcement, educators and government officials in order to prevent discrimination and foster equal opportunity, and to address indidents of bias that may lead to community tension between racial, ethnic and other groups.”
“PHRC has administrative, legal and investigative staff, overseen by an executive director in Harrisburg and regional directors in Harrisburg, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.” http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/about_us/18975
The PHRC investigated the claims in quite detail. They examined the allegations that were made by the former employee and conducted interviews to get to the truth of the claims. Fortunately Phil Cannella was able to make a presentation of material facts to the supervising investigator so that she would have all the facts at hand in order to get to the truth.
Just as Phil Cannella’s mantra with his company Retirement Media Inc. is “Truth for the American Retiree” so is it his mantra in his legal affairs where he seeks the truth in order to get a correct and valid resolution of matters. To that end he himself conducted a thorough internal investigation of the accusations to review their merits and without prejudice had the findings well documented. What became abundantly clear when the facts were gotten on the table is that the allegations appeared to be one for one lies. On no uncertain terms did any discrimination occur. To the contrary, according to the former employee’s own statements from months prior, he had profusely thanked Phil Cannella for the abundant care he had provided to the employee at a time of need.
Furthermore, allowances were made for this employee that were far beyond what others were getting to make it easier for him to work.
All of this was done not just because this employee had been in a protected class under the American’s with Disabilities Act, but out of concern from Phil that stemmed from the heart. Unfortunately this employee decided to pay back his gratitude with a frivolous discrimination and harassment claim.
Fortunately the PHRC saw through it and dismissed the claim outright based on a lack of credible evidence and the EEOC echoed those same findings.
