Page 1 of 9  

Dear Royal Caribbean International, 1. Appeal of Dismissal Decision  1.1 It is with anxiety that I am writing to you to appeal the decision to dismiss me from my employment contract on May 4, 2014 by the Master of the Independence of the Seas, Henrik Loy. I am asking to be reinstated as an employee of Royal Caribbean International and be eligible to resume duties for the company. My appeal is based on 8 points. I also provide additional supporting narrative in an APPENDIX which lends context to many of the points discussed herein. 1.2. During my ten months working in Adventure Ocean, I was a top performer in my department and a model Royal Caribbean employee. Page 1 1.3. I consistently demonstrated an ability to immediately learn from my mistakes and improve my performance. Page 2 1.4. I received excessively punitive discipline (Written Warnings) which was inconsistent with the intent of Royal Caribbean "Progressive Disciplinary Process (SQM, 6.07)." Page 3 1.5. Punitive measures were incorrectly used as a substitute for proper training which is also inconsistent with the intent of SQM 6.07. Page 4 1.6. I received two Written Warnings within 24 hours for occurrences which happened 48-72 hours prior and was never given the opportunity to reconcile my mistakes. Page 5 1.7. I was forced to undergo a Master's Hearing without a reasonable opportunity to exercise my right to have a witness present under the implied threat of facing a penalty if I did. Page 6 1.8. I was dismissed against the recommendations of the Adventure Ocean Manager, Cruise Director, Hotel Director, and Staff Captain (all of whom advocated for my retention). Page 7 1.9. My dismissal was inconsistent with the way in which other Royal Caribbean employees are treated, raising suspicions of a predetermined outcome and discriminatory motives. Page 8 2. Excellent Job Performance  2.1 On my first ever cruise, my manager, Matt Ducharme, praised me for the surprising number of positive comments which specifically named me. He wrote in my performance review that it was hard to remember that I was a new hire and not a seasoned veteran. During my first contract in Adventure Ocean, I was placed in charge of the under-three family play area. During my 2+ month tenure, the program received consistent perfect 300 ratings from guest. 2.2. I was furnished with copies of every single guest rating that our department received during my first contract. While I was in Adventure Ocean, I consistently received more positive

Page 2 of 9  

mentions by name than any other member of my staff. The ratings for Adventure Ocean went down when I was absent in contrast to the perfect ratings that were received for my work in the under-three play area. I was a model employee providing the highest level of service within the department and the guest surveys, department ratings, numerous WOW cards and VIC cards directly reflected this. 2.3. I was dedicated to being a strong ambassador for the brand. For example, I repeatedly went out of my way to go "on duty" while spending "free time" on the ship as well as ashore to help guests sort out problems. I had a track record of singing Royal Caribbean's praises in public and in private. I love the company and I want everyone to know how great it is!1 2.4. I voluntarily helped out in other departments every chance I was given. Ask the Shore Excursions manager about the times I showed up during my time off and would spend over an hour helping her manage crowds of guests when debarkations were delayed. You could ask Cruise Staff members Rachel Ward and David Mac how I volunteered to be in or understudy for every single production that was put on by the Cruise Director's staff. You could ask the Spa and Retail personnel about the many times in which I voluntarily showed up and enthusiastically helped them sell products and services to guests during my free time. 2.5. I relentlessly pursued more knowledge about my job. Please ask the T&D Managers Gary Aiken and Danica Čolić about how I peppered them with questions about the job, areas in which I could learn where I wasn't being currently trained, classes I could sit in on that I wasn't required to attend, and extra duties I could volunteer for. Ask the Adventure Ocean Assistant Manager (AAOM) Laura Davidson how many times I asked her to furnish me with SQM's, regulations, directives, and learning opportunities to do my job in Adventure Ocean better. 2.6. I always went out of my way to be a team player and would bend over backward in a heartbeat to help my colleagues when they were in need. Just ask my colleagues, Merve Eren, Isobel Ingram, Alcilene Souza, Jane Kenny, Andy Moore, Sophie Cunningham, Victoria Thomson, Natasha Vakulenko, Nydia Fernández, Luis Rodriguez, Kerrie Irwin, Monica Bonnelo, and Margarita Arboleda about what kind of team player I was and how I went above and beyond to show up for them at work and outside of work when they were in need. 3. Demonstrated Immediate Learning From Mistakes  3.1. Captain Loy stated that the reason for my dismissal was because the fact that I had received three Written Warnings "demonstrated a repeated failure to learn from my mistakes." Not only is this untrue, but after carefully reviewing the circumstances which led to my Master's Hearing and how Royal Caribbean's progressive disciplinary policies were applied, I have begun to suspect that perhaps I should not have received a Master's Hearing in the first place. 3.2. In response to the Master's statement that I had "demonstrated a repeated failure to learn from my mistakes" I would suggest that this demonstrates a misuse of the "Progressive                                                        1 "Why the Last Six Months Were the Best Six Months of My Life" by Zachariah Wiedeman, 6 January 2014 http://blog.mrzach.com/2014/01/best‐six‐months‐of‐my‐life/ 

Page 3 of 9  

Disciplinary Process (SQM, 6.07)." While it is true that I did have three Written Warnings, the first Written Warning was for an incident which had occurred seven months prior and had never reoccurred. 3.3. The first Written Warning was given to me early in my first contract for a mistake I made in interpreting my schedule. I believed I was not scheduled to work when I was. The work shift was a one hour shift to assist the Shore Excursions department and I misread the time I was expected to report for duty. When the Adventure Ocean Manager (AOM), Tracey Sanders, called my room to inform me I was missing a shift, I was awake and ready for duty and stated that I could immediately report to Shore Excursions. However, my manager told me it was too late to report and not to bother because they didn't need me. I felt terrible, and this was a mistake which I quickly learned from and corrected. I never repeated this error again for the remainder of my employment with Royal Caribbean. 3.4. I completely accepted the seriousness of this infraction and did not disagree with receiving a Written Warning for it at the time. However, when my AOM was giving me the Written Warning, she expressed a desire to give me a Verbal Warning instead but said she could not because I had previously received a Verbal Warning for boarding the ship late several months prior and SQM 6.07 mandated that I receive a Written Warning.2 I believe this demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how SQM 6.07 is intended to be applied and the discretion which managers may exercise when dispensing discipline. 4. Misapplication of "Progressive Disciplinary Process" i.e. Mandated Punitive Measures  4.1. When I received my second Written Warning on May 2, 2014, my manager, Matt Ducharme, expressed to me that he did not want to give me a Written Warning and preferred a less punitive form of punishment. He cited Royal Caribbean's "Progressive Disciplinary Policy (SQM 6.07)" and stated that it mandated that he give me a Written Warning due to the fact that I already had a Written Warning on file, regardless of the severity or dissimilarity of the subsequent infraction. He specifically said that his "hands were tied" and he was unable to give a Performance Opportunity Log (POL) or a Verbal Warning even though he wanted to. 4.2. As I understand it, SQM 6.07 appears to be designed to restrict overly punitive levels of discipline by listing when a manager may give Verbal and Written Warnings but it does not mandate specific levels of warnings nor preclude the manager from exercising discretion. If Mr. Ducharme was free to exercise discretion, he stated that he would have given me a POL in lieu of my first Verbal Warning and a POL or Verbal Warning in lieu of my second Written Warning. If Ms. Sanders was free to exercise discretion, she stated that she would have given me a POL or Verbal Warning instead of my first Written Warning. 4.3. Further evidence that Mr. Ducharme may have been mistakenly been dispensing more excessive punitive measures than he wished to is evidenced by his strong advocacy for my

                                                       2 See APPENDIX, Page 1, Paragraph A. Verbal Warning Against Manager's Wishes 

Page 4 of 9  

retention at my Master's Hearing and his adamant disagreement with the result. He said that my dismissal "left a bad taste in his mouth" and he did not consider me legitimately fired. 4.4. I was told three times by two different AOM's that they did not want to give me the level of punishment they were giving me but were forced to do so due to policy. This raises the question: Were my managers free to exercise discretion and deal with those incidents (One Verbal and two Written Warnings) with less punitive measures or were they mandated by SQM 6.07 to dole out harsher punishment against their wishes? Each infraction was a first time offense and I certainly learned my lessons the warnings were intended to teach. Why could my managers not train me using less punitive measures? 4.5. I can only conclude that if Mr. Ducharme and Ms. Sanders were sincere in their expressed wishes to give me a POL in lieu of a Verbal Warning and a POL or Verbal Warning in lieu of two Written Warnings and if Royal Caribbean policy did in fact allow them to exercise their discretion then the punitive discipline I received was by mistake. Had the mistake not been made, I would have never had a Master's Hearing in the first place. 5. Progressive Disciplinary Process Used as a Substitute for Training  5.1. It is my understanding that SQM 6.07's primary function is to act as a training tool and its secondary function is to document negative performance. The first problem with this is that the Progressive Disciplinary Process is being used as an outright replacement for training. 5.2. For example, most POL's that employees receive come in the early stages of their contract for violating a procedure about which they were never told. During my first contract, I observed that thorough training on policies were not provided in order to avoid mistakes. Rather, POL's were used as a substitute for training after mistakes were made. It felt as if employees were being "set up to fail" rather than being prepared to succeed. With no formal training regiment, Adventure Ocean staff only learn what their coworkers happen to remember to tell them. This can only be described as "learn by failing." It is especially upsetting to an employee to receive what seems like a "punishment" for failing to meet job expectations they could not have reasonably known were stipulated. Regardless of being told that a POL is not supposed to carry punitive weight that is a small consolation to new employees who repeatedly had information intentionally withheld from them by staff members who didn't like them and would report unknown policy violations to a manager leading to a POL or worse. 5.3. The most troubling concern I have with my second Written Warning is not that my manager expressed a desire to give me a lower form of discipline, but that I was accused of violating a company policy3 of which I was completely unaware after working eight months in Adventure Ocean. Of all the members on my staff I was probably the most concerned with always following every rule and regulation properly. My managers can attest to this and they can attest to the fact that I relentlessly and proactively pursued additional clarification of how to execute my duties and knowledge of company policies and procedures. The fact that I could have made a mistake

                                                       3 See APPENDIX, Page 1 Paragraph B. Written Warning 2: Inadvertent Company Policy Violation 

Page 5 of 9  

while passionately trying to follow every last rule and regulation is a testament to the gaps in the training and preparedness regiment that has been provided by Royal Caribbean within the Adventure Ocean department. 5.4. Ultimately, I did not disagree with the notion that what I did was not allowed. However, I found it very confusing to the point of being frustrating that a harsh punitive measure such as a Written Warning was used to correct a first time mistake. I was an employee in need of training and instruction. I made a mistake, which I accepted, and was able and willing to learn from it. For all intents and purposes, it would have never happened again. Yet, despite the fact that I believe I was not given the opportunity to preemptively avoid the mistake through clear training, I was certainly never even given the opportunity to prove that I had learned from it because I received another written warning 24 hours later for something that had occurred several days prior and was dismissed the next day. 6. Lack of Opportunity to Respond Positively to Discipline  6.1. The second and third Written Warnings I received are especially troubling in light of the dismissal reason that I "demonstrated a repeated failure to learn from my mistakes." How is it possible to demonstrate that you are learning from two completely dissimilar mistakes in less than 36 and 12 hours respectively? 6.2. Thirty-six hours prior to my Master's Hearing I had only one Written Warning on my record from seven months prior, in October 2013. During the following seven months, I clearly proved that I learned from that mistake because nothing like that ever happened again. The next two Written Warnings were for entirely dissimilar mistakes. For that reason alone, I am forced to pause and wonder at the logic or justice of my dismissal. 6.3. In addition to reporting the incident that led to my second Written Warning, Luis Lugo reported the incident that led to my third Written Warning on May 3, 2014 and my dismissal on May 4, 2014.4 I was issued the Written Warning in a meeting with the Cruise Director, Mike Hunnerup and my manager, Matt Ducharme. I confessed my regret and shame for my actions. Both Mr. Hunnerup and Mr. Ducharme told me that the only thing I did wrong was to express a negative experience with a coworker in a manner which other staff members had access to read. They also said that they suspected that my intent was to hurt the coworker's feelings and that one could possibly "detect undertones of malice" if one were to "read between the lines" of what I had written. 6.4. I immediately recognized the error of my ways and confessed my shame and regret for my actions. That night, I began to compose an apology letter to the entire Adventure Ocean staff. However, because of the events that followed the next morning leading up to my dismissal, I was unable to deliver it before leaving the ship. Instead, I emailed it to my Mr. Ducharme later that afternoon and he assured me that he would delivere it to my team.

                                                       4 See APPENDIX, Page 3 Paragraph C. Written Warning 3: Inappropriate Expression of Grievance with Colleague 

Page 6 of 9  

6.5. In the instance of both Written Warnings, I immediately acknowledged my fault and there was no reason to believe that I was unable or unwilling to correct the error of my ways. In regards to the second Written Warning, there was absolutely no reason to believe that I would make such a mistake again, considering I was the most proactive member of my staff about learning and following policies. Even after receiving the second Written Warning there was literally nothing I could have done to avoid receiving the third because the incident for which the third Written Warning was given had already occurred two days prior. 6.6. In conclusion, I believe it is impossible to demonstrate that I had failed to learn from my mistakes due to the fact that both mistakes were made days prior to either one being addressed and my Master's Hearing was held less than 36 hours after the Written Warnings were given. This seems to be inconsistent not only with the intent of the Progressive Disciplinary Process being used as a training mechanism, but also with the notion that I somehow demonstrated a failure to adjust my behavior after repeated warnings. 7. Prevented from Having a Witness at Master's Hearing  7.1. On May 4, 2014, I was in a friend's room preparing to leave the ship when I received a phone call at approximately 8 a.m. instructing me to stay exactly where I was because I needed to attend a meeting in the immediate future. I waited in my friend's room for several hours; I didn't eat breakfast and I didn't eat lunch because I was told to wait by that phone so that I could be called at a moment's notice for the meeting. Finally, after five hours of waiting, at 1 p.m., Mr. Ducharme instructed me to meet him outside the security office. It was then that he told me that I was to attend a Master's Hearing. He added that everyone involved was eager to "get it over with" because it should have been held hours prior, but was unexpectedly delayed. 7.2. Mr. Ducharme briefed me on what to expect in the hearing. He told me that the hearing was nothing to worry about; this was standard procedure when someone received three Written Warnings within a one year period. He told me that I would be confronted with the contents of each Written Warning and that I would need to explain whether or not I had learned my lesson from them. He said that if I was forthcoming, it was unlikely I would be dismissed, because each infraction was for completely unrelated things and he felt I had learned my lesson. 7.3. A few minutes before we entered the hearing, the H.R. manager, Samar Kumulkar, approached me and asked me who I wanted as a witness to the proceedings. I had no idea what he was talking about. Mr. Ducharme told me that he had forgotten that I could request a witness but he would help me contact someone. I thought of people I knew with experience in the company and familiarity with this type of proceedings whom I could ask to be a witness. My first choice was the T&D Manager, but she was not on the ship. In fact, no one that I knew was on the ship - it was the last turnaround day before the Atlantic crossing and the ship was operating on a skeleton staff who, if they were on the ship, were very busy working and had no one to replace them. Those who were not on the ship were unlikely to return until moments before we set sail, and by then it would be too late to hold the hearing that day.

Page 7 of 9  

7.4. Just before the hearing began, Captain Loy, asked me if I would like to have a witness present. I asked the Hotel Director, Bernard Stacher, what the purpose of a witness was. He told me it was to insure that the hearing would be properly conducted according to regulations. I told the Master that I definitely would like to have a witness present and I felt extremely uncomfortable without a witness. I explained that anyone I wanted to be a witness was not on the ship. I expressed my fear that if I asked to delay the hearing until the T&D Manager was available, it would be held against me and negatively impact the outcome of the hearing. Captain Loy simply replied, "Let's proceed then." 7.5. I have been told that having a witness present for a Master's Hearing is a guaranteed right. However, I was placed in a situation where I was unable to reasonably exercise that right even though I I wanted to. Therefore, I have no way of knowing if procedures were properly followed in the hearing. Even though I expressed a desire to invoke that right and a concern that doing so would have negative consequences, these concerns were ignored and the hearing proceeded without a witness and against my expressed wishes to have one present. 8. Dismissed Against the Recommendations of Four Senior Staff Members  8.1. The Master opened the hearing by stating that he believed I had "demonstrated a repeated failure to learn from my mistakes," and told me that I had received three Written warnings and asked me what I had to say for myself. I very briefly explained that in each instance I understood what I had done wrong and had taken steps to correct the problems. I had diligently applied myself over the past seven months after my first Written Warning to make sure I was never late or missed a shift. I would have never knowingly violated the regulation I was accused of violating in my second Written Warning. Now that I was aware of the policy, it would never happen again. My manger could affirm that I was one of the most diligent members of our staff in regards to following every rule and regulation. As for the third Written Warning, I was deeply ashamed at the lapse in judgment that led me to express myself in a hurtful manner before the rest of the staff, and I was determined to proceed in my duties with a renewed sense of sensitivity to how my actions would affect others. 8.2. Then, Mr. Ducharme, Mr. Hunnerup, and Mr. Stacher each expressed their displeasure with me over the incident that had caused my third Written Warning and told me that they hoped it would serve as a wake-up call for me to do better. I stated that this was indeed a wake-up call and I was determined more than ever to be a positive force within the department. No other issues were brought up and no other questions were asked. At that time, I was told that my contribution to the hearing was over and I was instructed to wait outside the room. 8.3. After about ten minutes I was invited back into the room. Captain Loy told me that he believed I was unsatisfactory in my job performance and he had chosen to dismiss me. Apart from the Master, everyone else in the room seemed upset by the decision. Minutes later, Mr. Ducharme told me that in six years with Royal Caribbean he had never seen a Captain dismiss an individual in their first Master's Hearing when the their manager, Cruise Director, Hotel Director, and Staff Captain had all recommended for retention. He indicated that the outcome appeared to be determined prior to the hearing even taking place.

Page 8 of 9  

9. Inconsistent Dismissals and Discrimination Against Employees  9.1. It does seem very unusual that this happened the way it did. Why have a hearing if the outcome was decided ahead of time and the statements of the employee "on trial" and recommendations of the senior staff are disregarded? Do Royal Caribbean Captains consistently dismiss everyone with three written warnings regardless of senior staff input or was I an exception? If so, why? Is it simply that the infractions for which I received written warnings were so egregious that any employee in my exact same situation would have been dismissed? 9.2. I recall other crew members on the Independence who received Master's Hearings in the past and were not dismissed, even though they had deliberately violated ship's rules, broken laws, and engaged in blatantly irresponsible and dangerous behavior. 9.3. Part of the difficulty to finding answers to these questions is due to the fact that I was denied the ability to have a witness in the hearing. I don't know if procedures were properly followed and if I received a fair hearing according to regulation, because I was effectively disallowed from having a witness. 9.4. All of these unusual factors make me suspicious that I was treated differently because I am an American. During my time aboard the Independence, I was repeatedly subjected to hostility and insults by crew members, including senior level managers, specifically for being American.5 I had several experiences where I was the only American in a group and I was singled out and treated differently by security personnel, finance and human resources staff, and food and beverage personnel. I tried to address these issues directly with the individuals involved which only made my treatment worse. On three different occasions I brought this to the attention of managers, and each of those three times time my concerns were ignored and dismissed.6 9.5. Of 1,360 international crew members serving aboard the Independence of the Seas at any given time there are 35-45 crew members from the United States and most of them work in the Entertainment Division. To my knowledge, none of the management positions were filled by Americans during the year I was aboard the ship. After having suffered repeated discrimination and hostility as a minority aboard the ship and having my complaints indelicately ignored by management, I cannot help but wonder if the reason my termination seemed unusual and inconsistent with the treatment of other crew members was because of my nationality.    

                                                       5 See APPENDIX, Page 4 Paragraph D. Anti‐American Discrimination by Royal Caribbean Employees 6 See APPENDIX, Page 5 Paragraph D.6 

Page 9 of 9  

10. In Conclusion  10.1. I am left with many disturbing questions about the early termination of my contract. I would greatly appreciate it if you would please address my concerns and questions about how Royal Caribbean policies may or may not have been properly and equitably applied. 10.2. I absolutely love Royal Caribbean. I admire and aspire to live up to the company's values. Despite a few unpleasant experiences, that does not dissuade me from believing that Royal Caribbean is a well-intentioned company with an excellent product. 10.3. I would like nothing more than to be reinstated as an employee and be able to continue to deliver that product. I feel that my dismissal was a mistake and the statement on my Master's Hearing Form that I had "Unsatisfactory Job Performance," is a misrepresentation of my time with the company. Thank you for considering my reinstatement and addressing my concerns. Respectfully, Zachariah Wiedeman

APPENDIX  Page 1 of 7  

A. Verbal Warning Against Manager's Wishes  A.1. On August 6, 2013, in the third week of my first contract, I received a Verbal Warning for returning to the ship late. This was during my second cruise on the island and was the first time I had left the ship farther than walking distance. I left the ship with a large group of colleagues from the Youth Staff, Cruise Director's Staff, and Sports Staff and took a taxi to a location on the opposite side of the Ibiza where the Independence was docked. This group of about fifteen people decided to leave the beach where we had spent the afternoon just as I had walked away to purchase a bottle of water. When I returned everyone had left. A2. I had no idea where I was, I did not speak Spanish well enough to ask anyone for help, and I did not have enough money to pay for a cab back to the ship without sharing the fare. After searching for an ATM for nearly half an hour, I found a non-English speaking cab driver who agreed to help me find the Independence for a discounted fair. However, neither of us knew where the Independence was docked. A.3. We spent over an hour driving along the Ibiza coastline, going in and out of every marina until we finally found the Independence. I arrived approximately 40 past the crew all-aboard time. It was a horrifying experience, one which I quickly figured out how to avoid in the future. A.4. At the time Matt Ducharme gave me the Verbal Warning for the incident, he told me he did not want to give me a Verbal Warning, but rather a Performance Opportunity Log (POL). His reasons were that I was still a brand new employee, I had never done anything like this before and he felt my circumstances were extenuating. However, he was ordered by the Staff Captain to give me a Verbal Warning and was compelled to comply. At the time, I did not even understand the difference between a POL, a Verbal Warning and a Written Warning. A.5. My primary concern is that I wish I had been trained and prepared for this type of common situation. As a new and inexperienced employee, I would never have imagined such a thing could happen when departing the ship with a large group of colleagues. I felt betrayed by my work colleagues and set up for failure by the complete lack of preparation by Royal Caribbean. B. Written Warning 2: Inadvertent Company Policy Violation  B.1. On May 2, 2014, I received a Written Warning for violating company policy for bringing personal items into Adventure Ocean. This was because on April 30, I mistakenly brought my electric shaver into Adventure Ocean. The only reason I had it with me in the first place was because I worked an early morning shift and did not want to disturb my sleeping roommate while getting ready. So I took the shaver with me and used it in one of the employee bathrooms on the way to work. B.2. What I should have done next was to put the electric shaver in the Adventure Ocean Manager's office, but instead I accidentally left it in my pocket when I entered Adventure Ocean. Having already reported for work, when I realized my mistake, I thought that it would be acceptable to store the shaver in an area inaccessible to the children in the room: behind the DJ

APPENDIX  Page 2 of 7  

booth next to a container full of used Oxiver rags. I thought that because it was acceptable to store rags full of toxic chemicals in this location per the Adventure Ocean Manager's directive, it would be acceptable to store something there out of the children's reach. B.3. If you review my original statement in response to the Written Warning, I mistakenly said that I retrieved the electric shaver when I was leaving the room at the end of my work shift. More accurately, I retrieved my electric shaver when I was leaving the room after returning from lunch around 2 p.m. We were splitting the age groups, so I and another staff member transitioned the 3-5 year olds to another room. B.4. What ultimately got me in trouble was that as I was leaving the room, one of the 6-11 year-olds noticed the shaver in my hand and commented on it. As a joke, I turned it on and pretended to shave for a few seconds in an exaggerated silly manner to get a laugh out of the children. Thinking nothing of this I was surprised several days later to learn that my coworker, Luis Lugo, had taken issue with what I had done. Although he never indicated his disapproval at the time, he reported the incident to a manager who followed up by checking security tapes and then gave me a Written Warning for "shaving in Adventure Ocean." B.5. I have three concerns about this incident. First, I was told that the mere presence of an electric shaver anywhere in the room was a violation of a company policy that I should have known, even though I was never previously instructed on this. To demonstrate that I had been previously instructed on this, my manager referred to a team meeting one week prior in which he stated that he "no longer would allow team members to bring personal electronic devices such as laptops, iPads, cell phones, and MP3 players into Adventure Ocean" because "use of such devices, even in the line of work, might appear unprofessional to parents." I accept full responsibility for misinterpreting this directive as more narrow than it was intended to be. However, I do not believe this miscommunication was due to unreasonable negligence. I primarily took issue with the fact that I was being given a Written Warning for a first-time mistake. And Mr. Ducharme seemed to agree with the second part of my reasoning as I explained in Paragraph 4 of my appeal, yet he felt required by policy to give a Written Warning. B.6. My second concern is that this policy was not being equally enforced among the staff. Luis Lugo himself had brought his MP3 player to work a few days prior, a direct violation of Mr. Ducharme's explicit instructions. The Assistant Adventure Ocean Manager, Laura Davidson, was present in the room while Mr. Lugo was using the MP3 player and even fondly commented about specific songs on his playlist. However, this behavior was not corrected by Ms. Davidson, it was not brought to the AOM's attention, and Mr. Lugo continued to bring his MP3 player to work on subsequent days. Because Mr. Lugo kept his MP3 player out of sight from the parents, I took the lack of action on the part of management to be an implicit exception to the directive laid out by Mr. Ducharme. B.7. Finally, Mr. Lugo's intentions for going behind my back to report to management that I had my electric shaver in the room are suspect. It is difficult to believe that his actions were motivated by a concern that I was violating a policy that he was repeatedly and more directly violating himself, yet getting away with, seemingly with management's blessing. Mr. Lugo also reported the third incident for which I received a Written Warning. He and I had a history of

APPENDIX  Page 3 of 7  

disagreement in the workplace about specific procedures that led to him verbally abuse me. We subsequently filed HR complaints against each other.1 C. Written Warning 3: Inappropriate Expression of Grievance with Colleague  C.1. On April 3, 2014, my coworkers, Brittney Mongelli, broke an agreement at the last minute to do a favor for me which prevented me from following through on a promise I had made to attend a going away lunch the following day for my closest friend on the ship. This was personally very devastating. But as upsetting as it was, what was most upsetting was that another staff member informed me that Ms. Mongelli, who had only been working on the Independence for only a few days, was instructed by another Adventure Ocean staff member to break her agreement because I "was not a good person" and "did not deserve any favors." C.2. As a result, I was extremely uncomfortable around Ms. Mongelli. I never was assigned to work exclusively with her which further prevented us from building a rapport. I wanted to confront her about how her actions negatively impacted me and clear the air with the intention of bringing about positive reconciliation. However, due to a string of previous bad experiences I had with confronting other staff members with grievances or disagreements, I had learned that many of my colleagues could not handle even the hint of confrontation in any form without reacting negatively. I was afraid that any attempts to speak with Ms. Mongelli would make her feel threatened, be met with hostility, and have a negative outcome. C.3. On April 30, 2014, the exact same day I had accidentally brought my electric shaver into Adventure Ocean, I made a foolish snap judgment. A multi-page card was being passed around among the staff to write a farewell message on each page to Ms. Mongelli as she was about to depart the Independence in a few days. My first inclination was to write nothing on the card. But then it occurred to me that I could tell Ms. Mongelli in this card how her actions made me feel, and because she would likely be off the ship by the time she read it, she would not need to feel threatened by me and wouldn't need to react negatively. In that moment, I somehow thought I could simultaneously achieve closure while avoiding conflict and getting into trouble. C.4. So, I wrote in the card how our only interaction during her month long tenure on the ship had hurt me, that her reasoning seemed highly suspect, and that I thought she should know how bad that made me feel. I also wished her well in the future. Perhaps, I thought to myself, she would see how non-threatening I was being by writing this to her and it would give her a chance to pause and consider that she may have misjudged me. I hoped that she would give other people a chance before listening to gossip and negative talk. C.5. After further reflection, I am saddened by what I wrote and regret trying to reach a personal resolve in this manner. Plus Ms. Mongelli never saw my letter. Instead, Luis Lugo read it and removed it from the card after other staff members read it or were told about it. Ms. Mongelli was told by other staff members that I had written "something mean" on her card. Then the page with my message was given to the HR manager and a complaint was filed. Three days later, I

                                                       1 See APPENDIX, Page 5, Paragraph E. Altercation with Luis Lugo 

APPENDIX  Page 4 of 7  

found myself sitting in front of my Cruise Director and Adventure Ocean Manager being issued a Written Warning for having a negative interaction with my coworker. I was told that I had caused Ms. Mongelli deep embarrassment and that I had made many of the members of my staff annoyed with or afraid of me. D. Anti‐American Discrimination by Royal Caribbean Employees  D.1. I first began to notice discrimination immediately after returning to the Independence in January for my second contract. When I went to crew HR and finance they open expressed frustration at having to deal with "the American" because Americans were "too demanding" and required that many things be done differently than everyone else. D.2. I also began to notice that I when I was the only American in a group of crew members security would search my bag more thoroughly when I went on and off the ship while letting the crew in the line in front of me and behind me get by with a mere glance. This was especially apparent when I debarked one morning on a crew scuba diving excursion with Shore Excursions. Every member of the group of seven was ushered off the ship without having their equipment bags packed by Shore Excursions inspected. For some reason they stopped me, emptied the entire contents of my scuba gear on the floor, and thoroughly searched my bag, causing me to nearly miss departing on the excursion. D.3. On another occasion, while attempting to disembark the ship in San Juan, security told me my Passport Card was not valid. At the time, this was the only Passport identification I had because my Passport Book had been mistakenly confiscated. I asked to speak with a supervisor and the supervisor told me in front of a group of guests that she hated Americans for thinking we were special and that rules didn't apply to us. Several guests attempted to argue with the security supervisor about the validity of my Passport Card and the supervisor told me she refused to speak to me. I then went to the crew office and asked someone there to return my Passport Book or confirm the validity of my Passport Card with security and was again told that my Passport Card was not "real" and they had never seen such a thing in their life. Again, I was told that I expected "special treatment" because I was American. It seemed that, no one wanted to take time to help me disembark the ship because I was American and they were tired of "dealing with" Americans. D.4. I was willing to write off all of these incidents as simple misperceptions on my part, but what I could not write off was the negative talk about Americans I heard among the crew on a daily basis. "I hate Americans," "Americans are ignorant," "Americans are uncultured," "Americans are lazy," were phrases I heard repeatedly in the elevators, the hallways, at the crew bar, at the staff mess, and even in passenger areas when no guests were around. Sometimes I would find myself in the middle of conversations that turned into "American bashing" until someone realized I was American and uncomfortably changed the subject. Expressing any form of displeasure to someone about this kind of hostile speech merely earned me additional resentment from those crew member and their associates.

APPENDIX  Page 5 of 7  

D.5. On May 3, 2014, my last night on board the Independence, I found myself walking to the Windjammer Café with the Guest Services manager, a French Canadian, and the M&R manager, a British citizen, when they began laughing about how much they couldn't stand Americans. Several comments were made about how Americans were unreasonably demanding, ignorant, lazy, and uncultured. Then, the M&R manager turned to me with an amused look on his face and asked, "You're not American are you?" "Well, um, well, yes I am. I mean, um, I'm from Chicago... it's a very international city..." was the only answer I could give. He looked a little bit shocked for a moment and then just continued walking to dinner without saying another word. D.6. On three separate occasions I brought discrimination issues to the attention of my AOM, Maita Pangilinan, Cruise Director Joff Eaton, and Cruise Director Mike Hunnerup. Each time I received the exact same response: We would be sailing out of England soon and all the staff would turn their hatred towards our British guests and hostility towards Americans would be replaced by hostility towards the British, so I wouldn't have to worry much longer. D.7. Not only was that answer inadequate, it was inaccurate. Having spent most of my first contract sailing out of England, I knew this. Hateful and disrespectful language about Americans was not comparable. The main way British people were discussed was how they differed in service expectations than Americans and that they might not tip very well for extra effort but it was still expected to be given. It also probably didn't hurt that there were many times more crew members from the Commonwealth of Nations aboard the Independence and that many of the managers were British or Canadian. The attitude toward Americans was clear and expressed constantly. Many of my crew members hated the American government and they hated American people. That hatred was expressed towards me when they felt they could get away with it. And they did get away with it. E. Altercation with Luis Lugo  E.1. Near the end of February 2014, I had an unfortunate confrontation with Luis Lugo over how I handled a potty accident that occurred in the 3-5 year-olds room. Mr. Lugo and I were working the room together. When the incident occurred, he had very limited knowledge of how I handled it. Nonetheless, he was very displeased with what I did. Later, I would be vindicated by both the Adventure Ocean Manager and the HR Manager that the way I handled the incident was appropriate for the situation and Mr. Lugo was wrong in his criticism of me, but that did not matter in the moment. E.2. In the moment, Mr. Lugo was determined to repeatedly explain to me what I had done wrong and the big picture of how we handle potty incidents in a very condescending manner. The problem was that we had a room full of 3-5 year-olds for whom we were supposed to be running activities and the incident had already been taken care of. It was no longer a pressing concern. Despite my acknowledgement and acceptance of what Mr. Lugo was saying to me, and my attempts to steer our attention back to performing our immediate duties, Mr. Lugo was unrelenting and would not stop repeating himself, trying to lecture me on the topic.

APPENDIX  Page 6 of 7  

E.3. I never once argued with or disagreed with Mr. Lugo, but rather I listened to what he had to say. When he digressed into repetitive chastisement, I asked him if we could discuss the matter later at a more appropriate time. This merely served to strengthen his resolve to convince me that I still wasn't "getting it." He continued to pursue me with his criticism to the point that we were ignoring our duties to the children. E.4. In the interest of salvaging the situation, I excused myself and went into the adjacent room where I asked another staff member, Luis Rodriguez, to trade rooms with me. I didn't complain about Mr. Lugo to my colleague. I merely said that I would feel more comfortable working with the 6-8 year-olds that afternoon. Mr. Rodriguez agreed to switch with me. E.5. Later, after there were no children in the 3-5 year-old room, I approached Mr. Lugo at the gate between the rooms and told him that I appreciated what he had to say earlier. However, I was displeased with the repetitive and condescending manner in which he was saying it, especially at a time when we had more pressing concerns. Mr. Lugo saw this as an opportunity to renew his lecture of my failure in the situation. Again, without arguing, I told Mr. Lugo that I heard him and didn't really need to hear the same thing over again. This did not dissuade him and he became verbally abusive. So, I simply told Mr. Lugo that I felt like he was talking to me in a disrespectful manner, which made me uncomfortable, and that I would needed to walk away. E.6. After I began to walk away, Mr. Lugo shouted to me across the room, with children present, "You need to grow up!" I turned around, approached Mr. Lugo and asked him if this was the way he spoke to everyone. He told me he had said nothing wrong to which I leaned in and confidentially whispered to him, "You're being an asshole. We're done talking," and again walked away. E.7. The fact that I used the word "asshole" prompted Mr. Lugo to file an HR complaint against me for "losing my temper" and "being verbally abusive to him in the workplace" when he was "trying to coach me" in my job. He painted a picture that I was an individual with a quick temper who would not accept criticism, and that I was verbally abusive to my colleagues. My AOM, Maita Pangilinan, assistant manager, Kara, met with Mr. Lugo and me that evening to discuss the situation. The meeting primarily consisted of me trying to explain the circumstances surrounding the potty incident and why I felt that Mr. Lugo's timing and repetitive condescension was verbally abusive and prompted me to extricate myself from the situation. Even in the meeting, Mr. Lugo raised his voice, was disrespectful in his speech towards me, and laughed at me. The meeting was thoroughly unproductive. E.8. At the prompting of my manager, I submitted a statement to HR, telling my side of the story. After the HR Manager, Lynn McGarrity, met with Mr. Lugo and read both our statements she met with me and told me that it was apparent from Mr. Lugo's written statement and her conversation with him that he was being condescending and overbearing towards me even though he thought he was being helpful and was trying to coach and manage me. Ms. McGarrity found that the way I handled the potty incident was appropriate, given the circumstances, and it was clear that Mr. Lugo was not even fully aware of everything that had happened surrounding the incident and was incorrect in his admonishment.

APPENDIX  Page 7 of 7  

E.9. Ms. McGarrity also told me that she felt like I was put in a difficult position in my work place because, while I had only been with Royal Caribbean for a short time, my life experiences, my experience in childcare, my experience in professional work environments, and even in some cases, my experience managing people, far exceed that of many of my colleagues, including some AOM's. She said that she sympathized with me and that the challenge for me would be to "suffer" in a low level position for which the sum of my experiences made me overqualified. Finally, she concluded that it was understandable that I would call Mr. Lugo an "asshole" in that circumstance, and she was fairly confident I had not lost my temper or behaved unprofessionally. However, I needed to be careful and not accidentally give "jealous colleagues" ammunition that they could use against me by using offensive words.