I have a few things to say about the Daily Readers’ Representative Molly Moker’s “Critical of College Pro” column from Wednesay. I did read the original article and, if anything, was very grateful that someone was actually reporting on College Pro’s negative sides. As a journalist, I also realize that the article could have used some balance. 

However, there is a great story behind College Pro’s mishaps. I was a College Pro painter for a little under a month. The manager who hired me violated numerous employment regulations. When I was interviewed, he asked me whether I could “keep up with males.” This question violated basic gender discrimination rules in the workplace.

When I arrived on the jobsite, my training was substandard. I was required to use an extension ladder but was never trained to do so (violates Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards I’m sure).

I ended up learning this through another painter who didn’t have proper training either.

My manager later fired me because he needed to let someone go and he didn’t think I was keeping up.

In all truth, he was never on the jobsite to see whether I was keeping up. I was actually painting at a quicker speed than a good majority of the males. During the three weeks that I worked for College Pro, I didn’t receive a paycheck.

A month after I was fired I called my manager and he said he had lost my paperwork and it was never sent to College Pro.

My parents actually ended up calling him and College Pro to threaten lawsuits. College Pro headquarters denied that I ever worked for them and also told me there was nothing they could do because they are a franchise business. 

My manager ended up giving me my paycheck in the end of the summer (three months after I was fired) in the manner of a personal check to avoid a lawsuit.

Even though the article may have been imbalanced, I would argue that College Pro may need to be kept in check. 

Rachel Heiman is a University student. Please send comments to [email protected].