Version 01-2025
Last update: 23.01.2025
Hit Count: 9563
NO ONE IS MORE HATED THAN THE ONE WHO SPEAKS THE TRUTH
- Plato
In the pursuit of justice and transparency, this webpage endeavors to illuminate the alarming instances of mobbing and racial discrimination within Axpo Services AG (aka Axpo Holding). Our objective is twofold: to provide protection for victims against management hostility and harassment, and to enhance transparency for all stakeholders of this Swiss public company in the energy sector based in Baden, Switzerland. The claims presented here are substantiated with evidence, focusing solely on legal and ethical concerns without divulging confidential or business-sensitive data. The intentions behind these claims are not to harm or criticize the company; rather, they stem from efforts to resolve issues privately with shareholders and institutions.
However, the failure of perpetrators to rectify these issues over a year necessitates public address. It is important to note that under the Swiss legal system, potential criminal responsibility lies with individuals involved, not the entire company. Therefore, this webpage highlights specific individuals within the company responsible for the alleged misconduct, despite their attempts to use the company's name as a shield. The content of this webpage will be regularly updated as the process develops, with evidence shared incrementally with the public and available upon request to relevant authorities and media.
Between late 2021 and late 2022, an employee of Axpo Services AG endured a prolonged campaign of mobbing and discrimination orchestrated by certain management members, executed by the employee's supervisor. Despite reporting through the official corporate process, each instance was downplayed, and no corrective measures were taken. Escalating the matter to the CEO of Axpo, it was forwarded to the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) of Axpo, who ultimately engaged in inappropriate conduct, made racist comments, and threatened termination, unless the employee accepted a verbal statement denying harassment and stop the complaint. Despite requests by the employee, no official report to their conclusion was provided.
Since the process involved appealing to the CEO, from whom no official statement was received, and due to the employee being further harassed, this time by the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer herself, the Employee wrote a summary of the meeting and forwarded it to the CEO. The CEO claimed that two independent entities concluded the investigation, directing the employee to address concerns with their supervisor.
It was evident that none of the involved entities could be considered independent, as they both ultimately report to the CEO of Axpo himself. It became even more obvious following the presentation of Axpo report to the labor court in February 2024, emphasising that the so-called "investigation" interviewed only the perpetrator.
Subsequently, the employee was terminated under questionable circumstances and in an utterly unprofessional manner. Furthermore, the harassment persisted even after the employee's departure. The mistreated employee found themselves besieged by a barrage of threats and coercion, including the confiscation of personal assets, the issuance of a falsified reference letter besmirching their reputation, , and dealing with made-up accusations thrown at the authorities by the HR department. These malicious maneuvers were aimed squarely at inflicting further harm, threaten and intimidate the already harassed employee and in an attempt to prevent them from reporting the issue.
This webpage will present irrefutable evidence supporting each claim. While not all evidence will be posted due to the ongoing nature of the case, comprehensive details will be provided. Additionally, upon conclusion of the case, a book will be published elaborating on the proceedings. Furthermore, two subsequent case studies, detailing various phases of organizational misbehavior, are currently in development, with one already completed.
This section will outline the key issues within the company. Below is the list of individuals at Axpo, presumably directly or indirectly involved in the hostile actions against the employee (as of 2021-2023).
Internal Employees
External Participants
Over the span of a year, an Employee (E) has endured significant mobbing and discrimination at the hands of their Supervisor (S). This included the Supervisor's public assertion that the CTO and COO of the company held a negative opinion of this Employee, leading to the rejection of any new proposals they put forth. Furthermore, the Supervisor insisted that damaging rumors were circulating about them, both among senior management and within the team.
The situation further deteriorated as the Supervisor began reassigning the individual's responsibilities to others, including tasks initiated by the Employee themselves, effectively robbing them of development opportunities. Moreover, the Supervisor maliciously reneged on a promise to cover the cost of courses that were deemed mandatory, and which the Employee had already enrolled in.
Additionally, the Supervisor attempted to manipulate the Employee's performance evaluation. When confronted with evidence, the Supervisor acknowledged the need for adjustments but failed to follow through on implementing them.
Despite the Employee's repeated efforts to address and rectify these issues, they received no satisfactory explanation for the unwarranted behavior they have experienced.
This is not an isolated incident involving this Supervisor. A high churn rate of over 80% within two years in her department is the adequate reflection. This alarming turnover is primarily attributed to the Supervisor's lack of management experience and subject expertise.
After months of enduring the above mentioned mistreatment, the Employee explicitly requested a resolution to the issue. However, since the Supervisor failed to demonstrate Employee's performance problems, she resorted to a questionable attempt to attribute the mistreatment to the Employee's cultural background and purported communication challenges associated with it. When the Employee sought clarification regarding these allegations, no response was provided. This insult, and potentially a criminal act, was subsequently endorsed and exacerbated by the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) of Axpo Services AG , who asserted that discrimination based on ethnic background was justified, as will be elaborated below.
Even after the Employee diligently followed the internal complaint process regarding mobbing and harassment, no proper investigation ever took place and no report has been provided. Even upon appealing to the CEO of Axpo, as already mentioned.
Following their abusive termination, the mistreated Employee endured a relentless onslaught of threats and coercion. This included the confiscation of personal assets, the issuance of a falsified reference letter damaging their reputation, and fabricated accusations submitted to the authorities by the HR department.
A large number of individuals from the CEO's previous company were appointed to key positions, whose professional competence and ethical standards seem to be highly questionable. This has caused significant dissatisfaction among existing employees who are more qualified and deserving.
Despite not being obligated to appeal to the supervisor in the complaint process, the employee decided to do so as a gesture of goodwill and to try to resolve the issue amicably. They asked the supervisor to stop the harassment immediately and showed willingness to resolve the matter peacefully. However, the supervisor refused to address the issue, didn't deny any of the accusations, and suggested that the employee proceed with the formal complaint process.
As per the official complaint process, the Employee was required to speak with a confidant before proceeding with the complaint. Confidant — a person who could offer initial feedback and a third-party perspective. To ensure prudence, the Employee consulted with two confidants instead. Both of them reached the conclusion that the Employee should file a complaint, with one of them suggesting that the Employee speak to Movis beforehand.
Movis, a third-party legal consultant specializing in mobbing and harassment cases, was consulted for their opinion. They were taken aback not only by the multiple instances, each constituting a case of mobbing and discrimination, but also by the Supervisor's response when confronted about the issue. Consequently, Movis strongly recommended filing a complaint.
The Employee also reported the issue to HR, even though it was only advisory and not mandatory as per the complaint process. A meeting was arranged with the Supervisor's Supervisor (SS), the Human Resources Manager (HR), and the Employee. During the meeting, HR and particularly SS dismissed the whole complaint process with derisive condescension, suggesting it be ineffective and futile. His extremely dismissive and taunting attitude towards corporate compliance processes was very surprising, especially given his recent hire status and probationary period. However, his repeated boasting about his close connection to the CEO perhaps hinted at deeper company norms, where such behavior might be tolerated or even encouraged.
Despite the Employee's willingness to forego a formal complaint if the issues were addressed, they were told there were no problems to address, dismissing it as a misunderstanding. It was evident there was no intention to resolve the issues and the harassment will persist.
Following the submission of an initial written complaint and an interview with the Complaint Committee, the Employee was asked to provide a comprehensive report. The Employee complied, submitting a document exceeding 40 pages, inclusive of evidence. This report outlined 14 instances of mobbing and discrimination and the resulting harm to their health, career, and finances. Besides, several of the instances occurred on multiple occasions.
Around two months later, the Employee received a brief response from the Committee. This response merely restated the definition of mobbing and asserted that no mobbing had taken place. They have completely ignored the racial discrimination part. The Employee's requests for a detailed report or evidence supporting their conclusion, as well as clarification on why each of the 14 incidents did not qualify as mobbing and discrimination, remained unanswered. Consequently, the Employee escalated the matter to the next level in accordance with the process, reaching out to the Axpo's CEO.
It's important to note that the Complaint Committee is not an independent entity, nor does it act as a representative of a working council, which simply doesn't exist. Instead, it consists of a group of employees who volunteer to perform this role. The head of the committee is a legal counsel from one of the company's subsidiaries, who ultimately reports to the CFO according to the organisational structure.
In February 2024, an "investigation report" suddenly surfaced at the labor court of the Canton of Aargau. Doubts arise regarding the timely and proper generation of the report, as it has not been provided to the Employee despite repeated requests. More importantly, the report incriminates the authors, since it relies solely on an interview with the Supervisor, the presumed main perpetrator.
This leads to serious doubts on the fairness, integrity, and justice of the entire complaint process.
Upon appealing to the CEO of Axpo following the appeal process, the Employee's case was transferred to the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) of Axpo. However, during the scheduled video call with the CECO, two lawyers from an attorney's office hired by the CECO unexpectedly joined the call without prior notice. During the call, the external lawyer emphasized several times his "objectivity, despite being paid by the company", which raised questions about the necessity of such emphasis bordering on concern. Subsequently, it became evident that the attitude can be credited to the fact that no genuine investigation was to be conducted, and instead, they were building a case against the Employee.
About a month later, a conclusive meeting occurred, during which numerous unethical and shocking statements were made by the CECO and the hired lawyer (details in the protocol). Despite the Employee's attempts to contest some of these claims, including discrimination based on ethnicity, the CECO shockingly justified such discriminatory behavior.
To make matters worse, the Employee was threatened with an ultimatum: either accept their verbal decision or leave the company. When the Employee requested a written report of the investigation and their statements, they were refused, with the CECO actually stating that she "doesn't have time to write novels."
The CECO's response speaks volumes. By refusing to address the allegations and insisting on confirmation that the meeting wasn't recorded, it's evident they subsequently realized the gravity of the situation. This reaction doesn't align with someone "falsely accused"; rather, it suggests they're fully aware of their wrongdoing and now fear its potential consequences.
Due to the lack of an investigation report and the CECO's continued harassment during the meeting, the Employee submitted their own report to the CEO of Axpo, detailing exact statements from the meeting. However, the CEO's response was merely to advise the Employee to speak to their Supervisor.
It's crucial to highlight that it took at least four members of the complaint committee to conduct their investigation solely by questioning only the perpetrator. Despite this, both the CECO and CEO of Axpo audaciously claim that "two independent" entities reached a conclusion. This not only represents a complete mockery of ethical norms but also exposes a blatant disregard for the principles they are supposed to uphold.
The Employee's employment contract was terminated after reporting documented multiple instances of mobbing and discrimination to the CEO of Axpo, despite it being part of the company's official complaint process. This makes the contract termination a retaliatory abusive action. What's more, several people were aware of the termination even before the Employee was informed. The Employee's access to the company's infrastructure was unexpectedly cut off before the agreed-upon date, shedding more light on a lack of ethics, integrity, and professionalism.
Additionally, a significant retaliation campaign has been initiated and continues even after the Employee's departure from the company, following the Employee's expression of their intent to fight for their rights. Following are some of the retaliation examples:
The termination meeting, conducted by HR and SS, began with the Employee being informed that their contract was terminated. When the Employee asked for the reason, they were told it was because the case was reported to the CEO of Axpo. When the Employee challenged the compliance with the process, SS stated that "he got very pissed by this action nevertheless." Even though SS had previously repeatedly asserted that he wished to stay uninvolved in the case and claimed he had no knowledge of its status. Despite own claims, SS continued to express frustration, mentioning that they had to actually go and get themselves acquainted with the company's ethics processes. This is shocking not only because it occurred during the Employee's termination meeting but also because it underscores that, for the management, the entire ethics matter appears to be a joke, and it casts legitimate doubt on SS's credibility. There is a plethora of evidence disproving most of SS's statements as outright lies. Furthermore, some evidence points towards him being the "mastermind" behind this utterly misguided and failed foolish campaign.
In any case, during that meeting, after terminating the Employee's contract, they attempted to manipulate the Employee into submitting their own termination letter, accompanied by ongoing threats regarding potential consequences. It was evident that they were attempting to conceal their own unethical and potentially criminal behavior by shifting the responsibility onto the Employee. It remains unclear why they believed this approach was clever; nevertheless, the Employee chose not to accept the offer and, instead, decided to stand up for their rights and expose the unethical and potentially criminal actions of the management. For more details, please refer to the complete protocol below.
Crucially, after the Employee's repeated requests for a written termination reason, they, in fact, stated that it was because the Employee reported mobbing and discrimination to the CEO of Axpo. It remains unclear why they suddenly decided to acknowledge the truth on this specific occasion. Nonetheless, the Employee was pleased to have received it as is, without any further nonsensical explanations.
As another form of retaliation, the HR department decided to issue a false reference letter. However, driven by animosity or unprofessionalism, they went too far. Not only did they include baseless falsehoods about the Employee's performance, which had never been an issue according to their own previous statements, but the resulting negative reference letter also exceeds the legal norms required by Swiss labor law.
When the Employee objected to this false and unlawful reference letter, HR challenged them to provide reasons and evidence for why it should be amended. The Employee proposed a corrected version, backed by all necessary evidence and arguments. Nevertheless, HR refused any corrections without presenting evidence or arguments of their own.
It represents perhaps the most unprofessional and incompetent reference letter ever written, reflecting the caliber of those who authored it rather than the recipient.
Shortly before terminating the contract, HR and SS discovered that the Employee hadn't utilized their vacation days from the previous year, a violation of Swiss vacation regulations. This discovery led to a series of four calls.
During these calls, SS pressured the Employee to use the maximum available vacation days as soon as possible. Furthermore, SS insisted on scheduling these days to align with the timely completion of tasks due to a lack of additional resources. Despite the Employee's concerns about workload reduction affecting quality, SS disregarded this and insisted on the Employee using their vacation days, knowing they would still be working. SS even scheduled calls with Employee, during their so-called vacation.
One of the numerous threats of prosecution can be found here. It becomes evident that harassment and threats unfortunately appear to be the primary competencies of these individuals in management. It's worth noting that the Shareholders were initially informed in June 2023. As of now, no criminal prosecution has been initiated against the Employee. This is understandable, given that the Employee has not committed any criminal offenses, in contrast to the members of the management of the company.
The HR Manager even embezzled a small sum of money from an employee's personal card. This highlights their complete disregard for ethics, as they're willing to commit any level of criminal action, regardless of its scale, to proceed with their harassment and hostility. And as always, all their petty attempts to exert power result in the issue backfiring. This event may be the cheapest yet, allowing the HR employee to be officially labeled as a thief.
The HR manager and SS terminated the Employee's contract in an incompetent and abusive manner. To cover their actions, they suggested the Employee sign a resignation letter themselves, threatening potential consequences if denied. When this unethical proposition was rejected, they abruptly revoked access to the corporate network and laptop well before the specified leave date. Consequently, the Employee suffered a complete loss of personal data, incurring additional costs to the company, and was unable to bid farewell to colleagues and business partners. Their immediate deactivation of the email further illustrates the astonishing level of hostility displayed, especially considering the contradictions in their statements.
The HR and SS knowingly made multiple deliberate false statements to the cantonal authorities, represented by the unemployment insurance office.
Initially, they omitted the actual reason for the termination to avoid negative perception, since it is outrageous. When pressed, they falsely asserted that a webpage was created during the Employee's employment, when, in reality, it was created long after the Employee's departure, to combat harassment. These easily verifiable facts reflect either desperation or a complete disregard for authority on their part.
Additionally, they declined to provide the investigation protocol, which may not have existed at the time, and instead offered only "verbal explanations." Interestingly, this report surfaced in the labor court six months later without any apparent issue. It's plausible they withheld the report because it only questioned the perpetrator, a fact that would likely not satisfy any discerning individual, let alone an official authority.
They also alleged the Employee's unwillingness to work on assigned task without providing any evidence. Furthermore, they made false statements about the Employee's inability to integrate into the team, yet failed to provide any evidence to support their claim, thereby further incriminating themselves with lies.
There are further inconsistencies regarding supervisor feedback. Their claim that the Employee refused feedback contradicts another report submitted to the labor court, where they admitted the supervisor's failure to provide adequate feedback.
Lastly, they claim there was no performance issue, yet their reference letter portrays performance issues worse than legally allowed. This inconsistency further undermines their credibility.
Despite the attempts by HR and SS to manipulate and make false statements, the three-month ALK investigation concluded no fault on the part of the Employee.
Throughout this entire initiative, HR not only failed to conceal the truth, achieving the opposite result, but also engaged in another unlawful (and potentially criminal) action by sharing personal data of a former employee with a third party. When challenged by the Employee regarding why their data was shared with this third party, HR stated, "Axpo does not require your consent to protect its interest in any kind of legal proceedings against you".
The management, however, didn't stop there and proceeded to file a lawsuit with the Commercial Court of the Canton of Aargau against the Employee. For this legal action, they enlisted the services of another law firm, NKF, with the lawyers CG and LS. The rationale behind this peculiar action remains unclear, but the outcome is straightforward and logical: the court promptly dismissed all claims on the same day.
The evidence provided unequivocally points to a severe lack of ethics and compliance among certain managers, including executives, at Axpo Services AG, where the extent of corruption and the absence of ethical conduct among those individuals is staggering. There are no effective mechanisms in place to ensure compliance; instead, fake measures are used to target and eliminate those who report issues. Moreover, their tolerance, if not encouragement, of acts of mobbing and racial discrimination is unprecedented.
They disregard employee safety and well-being, which is their duty, not only in this case but in general. Despite being aware of this webpage, their aggressive measures have only exacerbated the situation, exposing other employees to further unethical behavior and damaging the company's reputation. Their frantic and intimidating response to the Employee's rightful and defensive actions reveals their lack of confidence in their own actions. Multiple law firms have been engaged to harass the Employee, seemingly with the sole aim of concealing the truth and wasting taxpayer money in the process.
These actions underscore the irresponsibility, incompetence, and utter lack of ethics within the current management. Their behavior is simply miserable.
They would even have pursued a criminal case against the Employee, if they hadn't known that the Employee meticulously documented every event for their protection, following the biased claim by the Complaint Committee. And while any potential accusation against the Employee would have been entirely baseless, the potential for criminal cases against several management representatives is considerable.
Immediately after the termination meeting, the legal insurance was contacted, and all the necessary information was provided.
In light of the governance audit conducted by Deloitte on behalf of the shareholders from the end of 2022 year until spring 2023, the Employee opted to file a complaint with them. Regrettably, owing to a confidentiality agreement, Deloitte was unable to divulge any specific details about the case. Nevertheless, an agreement was reached whereby the Employee was permitted to utilize the meeting protocol, including for public purposes.
To protect against continued retaliation by HR and the supervisor even after departing from the company, the Employee sought assistance from the Chairman of the Board. Unfortunately, they have not received a response. Instead, their appeal was redirected to the Chief People Officer, who simply reiterated the same statement provided by HR without offering any supporting evidence.
There was nothing new in his message—just the same highly implausible narrative. There were further implications of "criminal activity" on the part of the Employee and an attempt to manipulate the facts. However, the overwhelming evidence fully discredits such attempts at manipulation and the entities the CPO is claiming to be presenting.
An initial appeal to the shareholders (a.k.a. the Board of Directors representing the cantons of Northeastern Switzerland), urging them to conduct an internal investigation, was submitted immediately after the contract was terminated. An update letter was sent to the shareholders, outlining the ongoing hostility from the company's management, which encompasses not only ethical and potential criminal concerns but also details of lawsuits and publications. The purpose was to ensure they are well-informed about the situation.
However, no feedback has been received from the shareholders thus far. The lack of concern about open racists in mid and top management by those in supervisory roles is worrying.
Due to ongoing hostile harassment by the former employer, the Employee is taking action to protect themselves. This includes involving both Cantonal and Federal authorities and raising public awareness. Below is a list of institutions to which formal complaints and reports have been submitted, highlighting numerous deliberate misconducts by the management. Please note that this list is not exhaustive and will be expanded as the process continues to unfold.
The preliminary hearing in mid-February 2024 revealed a significant issue. The company's lawyer presented a supposed report from the Complaint Committee, which the Employee had repeatedly requested but never received. This report raises concerns as the decision was solely based on the Supervisor's interview, neglecting other witnesses to the reported actions. This fundamentally compromises the investigation's integrity, relying solely on the alleged wrongdoer's perspective. Axpo employees might find it revealing to know the repercussions they could face if they report harassment and/or discrimination.
The management's endorsement of this flawed process, even referred to as an "independent investigation" by the CEO and CECO of Axpo, suggests a complete disregard and disrespect for ethics and compliance regulations. This situation implies a toleration, if not encouragement, of mobbing and racial discrimination within Axpo. Needless to say, the Supervisor's statements are clearly false, to say the least.
According to their logic, mobbing only happens when the perpetrator admits to it, implying that mobbing does not exist as such. This insanity knows no bounds. It's disheartening that these individuals are in charge of what used to be a reputable state-owned company with numerous crucial responsibilities.
Following are the main documents in the proceedings with the Labour Court of the Canton of Aargau:
Upon reaching out to various authorities at both the cantonal and federal levels to escalate the issue, the Office for Economy and Labor of the Canton of Aargau (AWA - Amt für Wirtschaft und Arbeit) was identified as the entity to file complaints and seek support at the cantonal level. An official complaint highlighting the majority, though not all, of the allegations regarding ethical and potentially legal breaches has been lodged.
The essence of their response is as follows: The cantonal labor inspectorates enforce the Labor and Accident Insurance Acts, but the violations listed are beyond their jurisdiction. These issues must be pursued by individuals as private plaintiffs. While the inspectorate can review a company's measures against mobbing, they do not address specific cases. Moreover, confidentiality rules prohibit any correspondence regarding their activities.
This implies that none of the allegations, ranging from workplace racism to monitoring employee well-being and vacation days, will be investigated or addressed by the cantonal authorities. Employees are left to address practically any misconduct by their employers on their own. Hopefully, this statement applies universally to all companies and employees without bias or conflict of interest.
It's noteworthy that the office representative attempted to prevent the publication of their response citing confidentiality obligations. They suggested summarizing the correspondence in a "neutral document". While anonymizing all names in the correspondence represents a concession, the decision to retain the original response intact was made to uphold the integrity of the statement and avoid potential misinterpretations in the future.
Request for information and particularly the statements of the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer have been sent to EKR in October 2023. Excerpt from EKR's reply:
In May 2024, following the statement from the AWA and the exhaustion of all available instruments at the cantonal level, a repeated official support request was sent to the EKR.
EKR reviewed my complaint and advised me to contact the cantonal advisory office - ZüRAS. A detailed complaint and support request has been sent to ZüRAS.
ZüRAS collected all relevant information for their report and provided guidance on how to escalate the issue and raise awareness. They noted that anti-racism institutions in Switzerland are not very developed, with limited legal protection against racial discrimination apart from criminal law. Consequently, there is minimal institutional protection for foreigners against racism, particularly in the workplace.
In 2023, SECO was initially requested to provide guidance for an investigation request. They referred the matter to the cantonal authorities, who are responsible for the enforcement of labor law. After nearly a year of paperwork, filing the lawsuit with the labor court, and determining the responsible cantonal authority, it was identified as AWA.Their response is provided above, generally stating that they are not responsible for the issues mentioned and that it is a matter for a private lawsuit.
SECO further advises appealing to the Federal Court on the labor issue, in case of dissatisfaction with the result, which is likely the next step. Additionally, they recommend filing a criminal report on racism, though this option will be reserved as a last resort.
This ultimately means that there is absolutely no institution or authority that oversees ethical and potentially legal issues on the part of the executive management of this state-owned company, neither on the cantonal nor on the federal level. Or they simply do not want to get involved.
Regardless, it is now official that the cantonal and federal investigative resources have been exhausted in this matter, and the issue can be brought to the attention of international authorities. Only complaints at different levels will be further reported.
Despite persistent efforts to engage various cantonal and federal authorities for support and investigation, a glaring lack of oversight regarding critical issues at Axpo, the state-owned company, remains. Federal institutions claim their role is limited to issuing regulations, leaving enforcement to cantonal authorities. Meanwhile, cantonal authorities deflect responsibility, suggesting that the issues are private matters for lawsuits in labor court. Unfortunately, the labor court's narrow focus on abusive termination ignores the more serious issues of harassment, racial discrimination, and severe retaliation. These overlooked problems inflict significant damage not only on employees but also on the company and society, allowing the current management to continue their mistreatment and harassment without consequence.
Amid this bureaucratic maze, only ZüRAS stepped up, reviewing the case in detail. They provided valuable advisory support, confirming the steps already taken and gathering additional information for their reports and statistics. Yet, even ZüRAS is limited in their capacity, unable to conduct a thorough investigation or extend further support.
As governmental institutions have been addressed and the issue remains unresolved, with two processes still ongoing, a new chapter unfolds. This case will now be brought to the international stage. NGOs, independent international institutions, and the media will be mobilized to shed light on these injustices. The pursuit of justice transcends borders, and through international scrutiny and advocacy, there is hope for meaningful change and accountability.
A complaint and a request to the SHRI, as the only independent institution related to these issues, have been identified. An initial request for a possible investigation and/or advice has been sent.
The information provided is free for use by media outlets worldwide. The following selected media outlets will receive additional information for thorough investigation once the labor court of the Canton of Aargau communicates their ruling on the remaining issue.
Further information is also available upon request.
Additional Readings
Additional readings by Proud Asian, regarding the ongoing process include:
And Finally:
If you encounter harassment, bossing, mobbing, racial discrimination, or other unethical issues at Axpo Services AG, follow the company's procedures diligently for loyalty and thoroughness. However, be aware that seeking justice and support internally may not be fruitful, as exposing such issues could lead to personal repercussions. Once you speak up, you may face backlash and become perceived as the problem. The actual issue will most probably go unaddressed, replaced by lies, harassment, threats, intimidation, and expropriation.
It's crucial to gather sufficient evidence to support your claims and protect yourself, as dishonest attacks may persist even after leaving the company.
Need more information or have experienced a similar treatment? We're here to help. Reach out to us for further assistance and support.
Disclaimer: This document includes data sourced from Proud Asian. Any use or reference to this data should properly credit Proud Asian as the original source. The information provided is used for [state specific purpose, e.g., educational, research, or informational purposes], and all rights remain with Proud Asian and any associated content providers.