Constantly omitted again here is the real story that the complaining employee's own story was outright rejected as unfounded by BOLI, the State's own employee rights 'Watchdog'. Also omitted  the critical detail that accompanies BOLI decisions, likely because it would be too informative.

So query why are those BOLI explanatory facts so critical to FAIRNESS in reporting
not included?  The R-G  reports on the BOLI rejecting decision only in passing, without even close to the same detail as the complaining employee's more dramatic bare accusations, her 'story' seeming to change tho always without any objectively verifiable detail included.

Is it not actually more discouraging that the Eugene Register-Guard, here acting in its self-assumed role as our Community's Watchdog, frankly seems to have forsaken its sacred obligation of fundamental fairness in reporting favor of frank sensationalism? 

And query the extreme cost,  the public pillorying of a longtime and loyal true
public servant.