Shockey Latest to Waste MCHR’s Time

17 Feb

The February 14 Arnold Leader, as well as the Arnold Patch, report that Arnold Police Chief/City Administrator Bob Shockey has filed a discrimination complaint with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR) against the city of Arnold and council members Doris Borgelt and Ken Moss. The Leader quotes the complaint as saying:

He has been the victim of ridicule, accused of lying, accused of targeting council members and other discriminatory behavior all due to his actions to investigate (Boone’s) complaint.”

Recall that the whole Susie Boone-Ken Moss saga started with an MCHR complaint. Recall also that, as stated in the December 27 Leader, the MCHR said it “could not do anything with the complaint. They would have to go to a different agency.”

The reason for this is simple. “The Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR) investigates complaints of discrimination in housing, employment, and places of public accommodations because of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age.” Boone did not allege that she was discriminated against based on any of these factors. Ergo, the complaint is not under the purview of MCHR. She refiled the complaint in December, undoubtedly to play up her age and gender in order to get a different response.

Since Shockey was here for the Boone ordeal, he knows the limitations of MCHR’s jurisidiction. Yet he filed his own claim, which is similarly irrelevant to MCHR. He says he is being retaliated against for following up on the Boone complaint. Retaliation is covered by MCHR, but here are a few caveats:

  • Shockey must be able to claim he was victim of an adverse employment action (termination, unjustified discipline, denial of promotion, etc.). Specifically, the MCHR adds that “Adverse actions do not include petty slights and annoyances, such as stray negative comments in an otherwise positive or neutral evaluation, “snubbing” a colleague, or negative comments that are justified by an employee’s poor work performance or history.” I think this statement encompasses Shockey’s allegations.
  • As mentioned above, we know that Boone’s complaint was not a valid discrimination complaint, as defined by MCHR. If there was no such complaint, can there be retaliation?
  • Do city council members count as Shockey’s employer? He works for the city, not the council. It appears that, as he is only interim administrator, he was appointed by the mayor and did not require council approval. It’s not clear to me that an appointed city employee can claim an adverse employment action against an elected council member. Against the city, yes, but what did the city do to him?

In short, this complaint appears to be without merit. It also appears to be timed conveniently close to the election.

As a side note, here’s a case, currently working its way through the courts, involving an MCHR claim by an Arnold police officer, filed against Shockey, for which the agency issued a Right-To-Sue letter. Further proof that he is familiar with how the MCHR is supposed to work.


4 Responses to “Shockey Latest to Waste MCHR’s Time”

  1. wrongonred February 17, 2013 at 9:56 pm #

    Have to ask, was “Suside Boone” a Freudian Slip? Has meme written all over it……”Suside”-killing ones own career through frivolous unfounded accusations and complaints while attempting to receive $70,000 in hush money like Matt Unrein did”


    • JC Penknife February 18, 2013 at 4:35 pm #

      Ha! I can assure you that was merely a coincidence.


      • wrongonred February 19, 2013 at 10:15 am #

        Isn’t that how the best memes are born? So what are the odds of The Leader or the Arnold Pravda actually covering this?



  1. Arnold Insurance Drop Makes No Sense | Jefferson County Penknife - June 24, 2013

    […] is true that Moss has a pending harassment claim against him that was filed by police chief/city administrator Bob Shockey. But I haven’t […]


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: