Friday, October 30, 2015

TSDC's Swing Doors Violate ADA

As Duke Ellington once said: "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing  Doo-wah, doo-wah, doo-wah, doo-wah, Doo-wah, doo-wah, doo-wah, doo-wah"

Let's have a look at The Sliding Door Company's problem child - the Swing Door.  

The Sliding Door Company's "Problem Child"

I'm going to devote a blog to TSDC's problematic and unsafe pivot hinges soon, and the fact that they have knocked off the locks of other manufacturers... but the issues with their swing doors are not limited to this. The picture on the left shows a double swing door with handles on a 1-1/2" frame.  When we look at ADA requirements, The Sliding Door Company's doors fail miserably.  Here's what the law says:

Flush bottom rails
For many years, ICC A117.1 has included a requirement for a 254-mm (10-in.) high flush bottom rail on manual doors, and this requirement is now included in the ADA standards. The text of both standards is similar, except ADA also addresses existing doors. (This requirement appears in the “Manual Doors” section of both publications, so it does not apply to automatic doors.)
The purpose is to avoid projections that could catch a cane, crutch, walker, or wheelchair and inhibit passage through the door opening, so the requirement applies to the push side of the door only. The 254-mm (10-in.) measurement is taken from the floor or ground to the top of the horizontal bottom rail, extending the full width of the door. Prior to the 2003 edition of A117.1, the required dimension was 305 mm (12 in.).

At the right, is a picture of a competitor's door.  Notice the bottom rail is 10" high and FLUSH.  To produce a door that is ADA compliant, The Sliding Door Company would have to start by having a 10" high flush surface or "kickplate" at the bottom of their door.  The reason for this surface is twofold.  The first reason is "cane detection" which means someone using a cane should be able to touch the surface without meeting obstructions or edges.  The second reason relates to the wheelchair footrest and its contact point.  Again, this needs to be a flush surface to ensure nothing on the wheelchair can snag on anything on the door.  And obviously, for doors without a kick plate, a wheelchair footrest could damage the door.  In the case of glass doors, the door could shatter when a footrest hits it.

OK, so... Let's have a look at what The Sliding Door Company offers... here are a few pictures from their SpacePlus page:


First, we see a lot of full swing door examples without the required bottom ADA rail.  A wheelchair footrest would crash right through these doors.  NONE of these would pass ADA, yet they are featured prominently on TSDC's commercial website.  

We also see The Sliding Door Company's attempt at an ADA kick plate here.  I have measured this and it is indeed 10" tall - the required height.  But... is it a "flush bottom rail"?  Obviously, it isn't.  Another image is below.
Not flush - so it doesn't pass ADA.  (You might have noticed the little object a couple of feet above the door latch.  No, that isn't another lock... it's a Mezuzah.)  

So, NOT A SINGLE IMAGE of a swing door on TSDC's SpacePlus website actually passes ADA.  

If none of their swing doors pass ADA, what EXACTLY is The Sliding Door Company selling to their commercial customers?

In a future blog, I will also address handle height and how TSDC violates ADA regulations with handle placement and blames it on their own commercial customer, Regus.

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Safety Issues with The Sliding Door Company's Bottom Tracks

You have a successful closet door.  Why not use it everywhere?  That's the logic behind The Sliding Door Company's use of bottom track systems in traffic areas.  

It's one thing to have a track at the bottom of a closet - and something completely different when people in a business have to negotiate a track on a daily basis.  There is a significant KNOWN hazard for ladies wearing high heels.  It has been reported to The Sliding Door Company but they would rather deal with this issue on a complaint-by-complaint basis.

Let's see what I'm talking about...

This system has three tracks on the left and four tracks on the right.
The picture to the right depicts a conference room with Sliding Door Company bottom tracks installed.  This isn't the worst case scenario, but it demonstrates the problem.

TSDC's own employees have experienced having high heels stick in these tracks.  The picture below is of TSDC's corporate offices.

Do gaps like this make sense in a business environment?

Notice the gaps in the tracks? Does this make sense in a business environment? 

Again, great idea for closets, but perhaps not a great choice for the workplace.

TSDC's "patented" "wheel-to-track"
mechanism hooks under the track.

At the right is a close-up picture of their track.  TSDC's "patented" "Wheel-to-track" mechanism hooks under the track.  This is why there are large gaps in TSDC's tracks that are not likely to be found in the tracks of competitive products.  This "selling feature" came at the price of customer safety.  Yet, they show this exact picture on their blog with the caption "Safety".  

So let's get technical and have a look at The Sliding Door Company's tracks.  I have downloaded a picture from their "Pro Tools" page which depicts their system configurations.

Here we see a SIX track configuration.  This shows a 10-inch piece of track that someone with high heels must step over to avoid possible injury (or damage to expensive shoes - something else that has been reported to TSDC by clients).  Does that seem reasonable in a commercial office, hospitality or retail space?  While the gap isn't dimensioned on this picture, you can get an idea of the size of the gap by looking at the "ADA" ramp dimension of 9/16".

How much pressure is on a high heel pressing into the track?  About 1500 psi.  Now look carefully at the configuration of the track above.  See the little hook that the sliding door rides on?  That works like a spring to capture a high heel.  A high heel pushing into the gap with THAT much pressure actually forces itself into the gap by very slightly displacing the hook which then captures the heel as the pressure is released when the person continues to take their step.  (Keep in mind, this is soft, um... I mean, "proprietary" aluminum).

And why are TSDC's tracks different from tracks from other door suppliers (who don't have this problem)?  The Sliding Door Company has a "patented" "wheel-to-track" system which they advertise.  This means they capture the hook to prevent their doors from coming off the tracks.  A better system, of course, would capture the track at the top and then these hazardous tracks would be unnecessary.  But that would require some re-tooling on TSDC's part, not to mention filing for a new patent and that sort of thing eats into profits.

Once again, the best choice is to avoid The Sliding Door Company.  Sure, they have products that don't require a bottom track - but they are quite happy to sell these hazardous bottom-track systems instead, particularly because they don't require the engineering that suspended systems require.

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Are You a Victim of Contract Fraud?

From the Complaints page:

I'm adding this "positive" review because it identifies a problem I will be discussing soon:
Alicia P.   New York, NY   1/23/2013
Very happy with the look.  Looks very sharp in our apartment. We got 2 closet doors to match 2 walls with the door dividers panels.  They work very well and the service was good.  One section came loose on the ceiling, because they are attached at the ceiling, and they came over and fixed it.
 I'm pretty sure nobody wants their sliding door system coming loose at the ceiling.  And, how, exactly, does something installed into studs come loose?  The simple answer is, it wasn't installed properly.  I'll explain:

The Sliding Door Company uses top tracks that must be installed into a "header".  This means they must go into solid wood (not drywall).  They clearly state this on their website.  Here's a picture of what they say it should look like:

This is a picture of what TSDC says they are going to do.  Notice the screw at the top is going into solid wood.

(BTW, also notice how the top and bottom of the door don't line up?  In a future blog we will discuss
how every door The Sliding Door Company installs MUST be installed crooked - it's part of the design.

Their picture is not exactly right, but it demonstrates their intent.  The picture above is missing the "drywall" or "gypsum board" ceiling that goes between the bracket and the wood stud.  Here's what is actually going on:

See the big gaps between the studs (the wood pieces with an X in them)?
The studs are typically 16" apart.  This means the installer has to
hit a 2" (or 1-1/2") wide piece of wood in a 32" target area -
EVERY SINGLE TIME in order to comply with the signed CONTRACT. 
So, the intent is to install their tracks into solid material ("header/blocking").  And that's what they're supposed to do - ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACT they have each of their customers sign.  In other words, they enter a binding contract that says they will fasten their systems into WOOD studs!  

So, why did Alicia P (above) need to have them fix a section that "came loose on the ceiling"?  Did the screws just unscrew themselves?  Or were they never properly installed into wood?  How would Alicia P know?  You can't see where the wood studs are when you look at the ceiling.

To get a good feel for what's happening here, we need to look at this from the viewpoint of the "installer".  The installer can't see where the studs are either.  In order to install the system, the installer must "find" each stud and screw into it.  There are tools ("stud finders") for this, but TSDC's installers aren't provided with these.

Nonetheless, it is the installer's responsibility to make the system work.  Keeping in mind that it is TSDC's CONTRACT they are installing to - a contract between TSDC and their customer, the installer is expected to install the system in accordance with that contract without having the proper tool to find the studs.  And, of course, there are other orders waiting to be installed.  The installer's only choice sometimes is to improperly install the system by guessing at where the studs might be.  What happens when they can't find the studs?  As Alicia P pointed out, entire sections of track can come loose.  An installer once told me that it's a good installation if he can hit the studs twice per track.

So, there's a HUGE discrepancy between how The Sliding Door Company says they will install their systems on their OWN CONTRACTS, and what actually is being installed in customer's homes.  

This is without question, CONTRACT FRAUD and is actionable by customers of TSDC.  Examine your contract carefully.  If it says your system was to be installed into "header/blocking" and your system wasn't, YOU may have a claim! 

Sunday, October 18, 2015

Consumer Product Fraud at The Sliding Door Company

Preventing Consumer Product Fraud 

In the CPG industry, the term consumer product fraud refers to economic adulteration and counterfeiting.
Economic adulteration is defined as the intentional fraudulent modification of finished product or ingredient for economic gain through methods such as dilution with a lesser value ingredient, concealment of damage or contamination, mislabeling of a product or ingredient, substitution of a lesser value ingredient or failing to disclose required product information.
Counterfeiting is defined as the unauthorized representation of a registered trademark carried on goods similar to goods for which the trademark is registered, with a view to deceiving the purchaser into believing that he or she is buying the original goods.
See "Beware of Impostors".  This exactly describes what The Sliding Door Company is doing with the Simpson Strong-tie bracket with the intent of deceiving inspectors.  Why else would they make their bracket IDENTICAL to the Simpson bracket?  In my view, the fraud here is intentional.  TSDC produces a bracket that looks identical to the Simpson Strong Tie bracket and inspectors can easily be fooled.  There is far more to TSDC's consumer fraud than this one example of counterfeiting.  Should they ever change their mindset and decide to STOP being a fraudulent company, here are some tips:

Consumer Product Fraud - How to Stop It Now
The melamine scare and similar incidents show that consumer goods remain vulnerable to tampering. Here are five strategies for detecting and deterring this type of fraud in your supply chain.
In 2008, the food and beverage industry was rocked by a major scandal when milk products from the People's Republic of China were found to have been adulterated with the chemical melamine. Melamine is a nitrogen-rich chemical that is sometimes added illegally to watered-down milk to make it appear to have a higher protein content. When ingested by humans or animals, the chemical can cause renal and urinary problems. At least 290,000 people were affected by the contamination and nearly 52,000 were hospitalized. More than 30 local and global milk brands were affected, the giant dairy producer Sanlu filed for bankruptcy, and more than 60 countries banned or recalled Chinese dairy products and other affected products, such as pet food. The total cost of the melamine adulteration has been estimated at US $10 billion.
This incident demonstrated how vulnerable to contamination and disruption the food supply chain can be, despite our modern safeguards and technology. Moreover, industry stakeholders recognized that a single instance of economic adulteration (where a product is altered for economic gain) can have global consequences, with broad and deep implications for a company's brands, an industry's performance, peoples' lives, and entire countries' reputations. 

Economic adulteration—a real risk

It is estimated that on a global basis, economic adulteration and counterfeiting of food and consumer products may cost those industries US $10 billion to US $15 billion per year. The consequences of fraudulent adulteration range from lost sales and bankruptcies to adverse health consequences and possibly even fatalities. Since 2007, prominent contamination cases such as diethylene glycol found in toothpaste, melamine contamination in milk and pet foods, lead tainted toys, and salmonella-contaminated peanuts have resulted in an estimated US $15 billion in costs and damages combined.The impact of such fraud on an individual company could be significant. The cost of one adulteration incident averages between 2 percent and 15 percent of yearly revenues, depending on company size.
The prospect of high profits and the low risk of detection (or if detected, punishment that is often fairly lenient) have always been motivating factors behind economic adulteration and counterfeiting. Today a host of new factors have further complicated industry's and government's ability to detect and deter fraudulent activities. These include: 
 An expanded global marketplace. As companies increasingly outsource manufacturing, sourcing, and logistics, they have less visibility and control of key processes. At the same time, more companies are engaging in sourcing and offshoring in emerging markets, which makes them vulnerable not only to domestic sources of fraud but also to international ones. What was once a local effort to stop economically motivated fraud has become an international challenge... Markets where product adulteration is common (because of less scrutiny) have become key sources of global supply—exposing manufacturers, brokers, and other purchasers to risk of fraud.
The power of the Internet. The Internet serves as a retail channel not only for legitimate consumer products but, increasingly, for counterfeit products as well. Counterfeiters can use the Internet to reach once unreachable consumers while also remaining anonymous, thus reducing the likelihood of being caught and prosecuted. Furthermore, Internet transactions are difficult to monitor and prosecute due to different rules and jurisdictions across geographies. 
More sophisticated perpetrators. Because they now have practically unlimited access to information, perpetrators are becoming more sophisticated in how they commit fraud. They have a better understanding of processes and standards, and they are constantly looking for ways to game the system. For example, in the melamine incident, the guilty parties knew that the methods used to test for protein levels in milk are unable to distinguish between nitrogen in melamine and nitrogen that occurs in milk's amino acids. 
Tighter economic conditions. In bad economic times, when commodity prices fluctuate, ingredients are in short supply, and buyers are pressing suppliers to lower their prices, there is often a spike in fraudulent activity as suppliers are squeezed by costs and surrender to temptation. This is particularly common in the aftermath of natural disasters or in other situations when agricultural supplies become short.
 The "silent" global food crisis. In the last two years, the world's attention has primarily focused on the financial and housing crises. Comparatively little attention has been paid to the global food crisis that is developing as population growth outstrips agricultural output in some parts of the world. On a political level, food shortages appear to be one of the key triggers of the current uprising in the Middle East.
While the looming food crisis might appear to be unrelated to economic adulteration, the two are closely linked. Food shortages, economic instability, and rising demand for goods create an imbalance between supply and demand that can motivate fraudulent activity. For example, in China demand for milk was outpacing supply; this reportedly led some farmers to water down their milk to increase volumes and then adulterate it with melamine so that it would appear to meet quality standards.

Raising the bar on safety and quality

How can we meet these new challenges? We can start by integrating additional fraud-prevention strategies into existing programs.
Step 1. Understand the product portfolio's vulnerabilities
To incorporate prevention of economic adulteration into an existing quality and safety program, companies need to begin by understanding all of the vulnerabilities in their product portfolio. This requires creating a data repository of potential threats, and then using models to forecast potential risks.
Step 2: Enhance detection programs
Most leading companies already use a number of sophisticated testing methods for detecting common, known quality and safety issues. Yet the inherent variability within natural raw materials makes it difficult to test for every unknown threat. Verifying the authenticity of an ingredient, therefore, can be simpler than verifying the absence of every possible adulterant. 
  • Test ingredients as early as possible.  TSDC never tests product ingredients... EVER!
  • Establish the right frequency for testing.  The right frequency for never testing products at TSDC is NEVER.
  • Define ingredient standards.  Instead, TSDC claims to have a "proprietary formula" for their products which they cannot produce.
  • Use multiple testers and testing methods.  Or even one? 
Step 3: Employ a comprehensive set of deterrence strategies
The costs associated with testing for all known and unknown contaminants are enormous. A more cost-effective way for a company to protect its brands and its consumers would be to apply a comprehensive set of deterrence strategies to prevent adulterated products from entering the supply chain in the first place.
  • Develop appropriate ingredient specifications.  Or at least use the ingredients you CLAIM to use when you developed your engineering data.
  • Establish an effective supplier audit program.  TSDC claims to "own" their factory - so they don't need a program to audit their supplier.  They accept whatever their supplier gives them.
  • Employ current intelligence networks. ( Finally, monitoring customer complaints can help to identify issues early on and allow companies to take timely action.)  What consumer complaints?  Oh these?
  • Increase traceability within the supply chain There is no incentive for TSDC to do this.  They are complicit in the fraudulent practices.
Step 4: Understand the implications of local risks
Some regions of the world are more vulnerable to the risk of economic adulteration than others. It's important, therefore, to understand local risks and their potential impact on operations.  China, where TSDC has its factory, is, unfortunately famous for this type of thing, and indeed was cited many times in this article as an example.  TSDC isn't a victim here - they are intentionally producing inferior products as cheaply as possible and representing them as something else ("proprietary formula").
Step 5: Deploy a holistic program across the organization
The steps we have elaborated so far are all proven strategies for detecting and deterring economic adulteration. But any approach to fraud prevention can only achieve its maximum effect if the entire organization is fully committed to that mission.  Unfortunately, there is no evidence to suggest anyone left at TSDC is interested in reducing product fraud.

Saturday, October 17, 2015

Is Filing a False Police Report a Crime?

Well, YES, it is... and thank you for asking.


The offense prohibits one to make a false report of a felony or misdemeanor to a peace officer, prosecutor, grand jury, or any employee designated to accept reports of criminal activity from citizens.

The Law:

148.5. (a) Every person who reports to any peace officer listed in Section 830.1 or 830.2, or subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, the Attorney General, or a deputy attorney general, or a district attorney, or a deputy district attorney that a felony or misdemeanor has been committed, knowing the report to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor. 

How does a prosecutor prove that a false report of a crime was committed under penal code 148.5:

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this offense, the prosecutor has to prove the following facts or elements:
  • Making a false report of criminal activity ((“Criminal activity” in this context entails a misdemeanor or a felony.))
The following actions are all examples of how one can make a false report:
  • making a report in person directly;
  • making a report via telephone;
  • initiating a report yourself without being solicited;
  • making a report after being solicited by one of the officials described above.
  • To any of the following authorities:
The following are all examples of the type of authorities a report can be made to:
  • peace or police officer
  • the Attorney General
  • deputy attorney general
  • district attorney
  • deputy district attorney
  • grand jury
  • or any employee who is assigned to accept reports from citizens with knowledge that the report is false.

Who can be charged with the offense of making a false report under penal code 148.5 in California? 

 Any person who makes a report knowing that it is false can be charged with making a false report under penal code 148.5 in california.
Did somebody at TSDC file a false police report in order to get me fired and to generate fear among the employees at TSDC?  Why YES!  Can you guess who?  Well, you won't have to guess.  I'm preparing a blog about this incident specifically and the spyware that was put on my computer.  We WILL get to the bottom of this and determine who the liar is and what motivated them to concoct a lie - right here on this blog.  Stay tuned...  

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Is there a "Cult" vibe at The Sliding Door Company?

"What a strange question" one might ask.  This sort of thing isn't easy to spot and no reports of TSDC sacrificing animals have surfaced.  

The Sliding Door Company is definitely a family-run business, so there's that vibe.  While it has been described to me as "La Familia", a Godfather figure running things, I think there are some "cult" like things going on here too.  It's definitely a very hostile environment in which people are carefully controlled.

So what constitutes and differentiates a "cult" and how might that be applied in a company setting? There are many articles describing this.  For example: 9 Ways Groups Become Cults defines nine very clear elements that suggest a cult-like atmosphere:  
Mind control: Cults use mind control and brainwashing techniques in virtually every aspect of their teachings, recruitment and policies. Cults aim to reduce one’s critical thinking skills and gain control of one’s thoughts, emotion and behavior through the use of mind control techniques.
Charismatic leader: Although many religious leaders are considered charismatic, cult leaders have a different kind of magnetism and power that wins over followers. A cult leader is considered the supreme authority of the group, and he or she typically becomes the object of worship. This figurehead commands the upmost [sic] respect and compliance from its members and they have the only and final ruling on matters.
Deception: Unlike most religions, cults will use deceptive and manipulative ploys to get people to join the cult and stay in it. They are notorious for using deceptive recruitment efforts, such as not identifying themselves and not being transparent about their organization or message.
Exclusivity:  Cults are notorious for claiming that they have an exclusive line to God and have a special revelation of the truth. 
Offer explanations and solutions to everything in life: Cults have a tendency to give ambiguous explanations for the most complex things in life and suggest unethical solutions to the world’s problems. These deceptive teachings are all part of the cult’s totalitarian worldview and brainwashing.
Exploitation: Information control keeps cult members from thinking critically and questioning the group’s beliefs.
Isolation and total dependency on the group:  Cult members are generally forced to cut ties with old family and friends and replace them with their new "family." 
Totalitarian worldview: As part of totalitarian control, cults often approve unethical behavior, whether it’s violence, deception or brainwashing, in order to foster the group’s beliefs.

Some employees find what they need in the TSDC family 
(not a photo of the actual family)

OK, let's look at another article:
Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups - Revised

I'm very inclined to comment on each of these, but let's just highlight for now.  I have left the check boxes in so employees at TSDC can take the test: 

 The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
 Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
 Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
 The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).
 The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
 The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
 The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
 The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
 The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.
 Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
 The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
 The group is preoccupied with making money
 Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
 Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
 The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

So, how is The Sliding Door Company like a cult?  Well, whether or not you think it's completely a cult might depend on your experience there, but there definitely IS a cult vibe there.  

What do I mean by this?  After all, a well-run business with a strong, karismatic leader could look similar, right?  

I think most people (even their own HR manager) would agree that TSDC's CEO, Doron is not a "people person".  And yet, he has a sort of "karisma" that nobody denies.  The "A Players" help promote this - making Doron appear larger-than-life. As an example, within a week of working there, I was told that Doron was formerly head of the intelligence department for the Israli government.  Really?  And now he's selling sliding doors?  Was this an rumor intended to make Doron seem "unaccountable to authorities", above the law, - or just "larger-than-life"?

The difference between a well-run business and a "cult" (as these articles indicate) is difficult to discern sometimes (that's why I am blogging about this).  The "cult" feel may very well be promoted by the "US vs THEM" attitude The Sliding Door Company has regarding their own customers.  There have been comments on Glassdoor suggesting TSDC's managers tend to seek out desperate people (single mothers) for employees - so there is some suggestion that they prefer employees who might need support from a company/family atmosphere.  When someone is desperate, they will tolerate a lot of abuse.  TSDC managers have exploited this vulnerability.  Yet, some employees find what they need in the TSDC family.  Those have become the "elders".  Even the elders, however, may live in fear of losing their jobs in a volatile work environment.

But there is more to the "fear factor" than just fear of losing a job - especially for managers (elders).  The "cult" is set up in such a way that once you're out, friends you made at TSDC are expected to ignore you - even socially.  It can be devastating for someone who has made good friends at work.  And it's a good negative incentive to keep employees from leaving.   How would TSDC know?  Well, the walls have ears.

So, there's definitely a lot of "harm" available to TSDC managers, should they choose to dispense it.  As you might expect, there's a good rumor mill in place at TSDC and the managers use it.  The person running the rumor mill is TSDC's HR Manager.  The rumor mill makes it possible for an employee to be the last person in the company to know they have been fired or demoted.  Controlling information is one of the main purposes of a cult.  Between the IT department spying on employees, and the HR department dispensing rumors, employees must be very conscious of what they say and do and even who they share information with at TSDC.  

As you might expect, TSDC is of course preoccupied with making money as any business should be.  This sets up the "US vs Them" situation in which dealing with a customer complaint gets in the way of their preoccupation with making money. 

TSDC's attitude: Customers are "THEM" and have no idea how much effort goes into making and installing sliding doors.  That they would even complain when something is done badly is disrespectful to TSDC and the work they do to make the world a better place - by making and installing beautiful sliding doors. 

Sunday, October 11, 2015

Happy Anniversary!

Happy Anniversary!  

The Sliding Door Complaint blog has been going for exactly one month today!  We launched on September 11, 2015.  

9/11 is a special day of memorial for all Americans.  I'm curious... who designed their logo?

Anyway, let's get to the reason for this blog.  Why are we here?  Why aren't we in court or in mediation quietly determining who is right and who is wrong?  

Well, we could settle this in court but a courtroom is the very LAST place TSDC wants to be.  They would have a lot of explaining to do to a judge wouldn't they?  And let's be clear here - they tried to pay me to go away quietly and I didn't accept their offer.  

I suspect their CEO, Doron, still doesn't realize how wrong what he did was.  And how it was illegal to retaliate against a whistle-blower, not to mention damaging to me personally.  A plausible lie doesn't replace the truth in my world so we are going to get to the bottom of what happened. Doron dragged his own family members, not to mention other employees and private investigators into the mess HE created.

His own attorney doesn't seem to get it - and issued a threatening letter proving this - demanding that I "cease and desist" trying to settle this matter quietly - while at the same time defaming ME.  In other words, TSDC continued and extended their harassment and bullying of me through their attorney.  So I suspect we may  be in court someday, but in the mean time... I don't let myself be threatened by bullies or their attorneys.  

And there's no reason we need to wait to do this in court.  Evidence is evidence and it won't go away just because I'm blogging about it.  So, I'm happy to whistle-blow until I'm blue in the face and Doron's red in the face.  There's a LOT to work with here and it feels good to get the truth out to the public.

Treating employees like me unethically is the tip of the iceberg.  TSDC treats customers unethically too as evidenced by their complaints.  And there seems to be no end to the customer complaints.  The more I blog, the more TSDC has to fix!!!  Especially now that the state and federal agencies have been alerted.

The only customer who doesn't seem to complain is Regus - and they have their own "complaint" blog just like this one.  Birds of a feather, I'd guess.  There are class-action lawsuits being considered against Regus and just recently, The Sliding Door Company.  

You're welcome!