June 18, 2009
By Rebecca Beyer
Daily Journal Staff Writer
SAN FRANCISCO - The private company charged with providing
protection at the nation's federal courts began an internal
investigation this week at the San Francisco federal courthouse
where three security officers allege they have been retaliated
against for reporting security breaches.
Several sources confirmed that personnel from New
Mexico-based Akal Security Inc. were interviewing individual
court security officers in response to the claims of the three
officers, which were laid out in a lawsuit filed in San
Francisco County Superior Court on June 5. Akal contracts with
the U.S. Marshals Service to provide security at federal courts
in 40 states around the nation.
Akal, one of the nation's leading private security companies,
has won more than $1 billion in federal contracts in the last
three years, including bids to guard federal courts, immigration
detention centers, NASA facilities and embassies.
An attorney who represents the officers suing Akal said she
was aware of the investigation.
"Our biggest concern right now is further acts of retaliation
by Akal management, both against our clients who have
courageously come forward to expose these serious security
issues, but also against witnesses who can corroborate these
claims," said Bernadette Bantly, of counsel at Bradley, Curley,
Asiano, Barrabee & Gale in San Francisco.
Bantly said she had received a report that Akal investigators
"are engaging in coercive and intimidation tactics while
interviewing witnesses" during the interviews which took place
Tuesday and Wednesday.
An Akal representative did not respond to a request for
comment. The company, based in New Mexico and founded in 1980,
is run by Sikh Dharma International, a religious nonprofit
group. The name Akal means "undying" or "deathless" in Sanskrit.
"The U.S. Marshals Service is aware of the lawsuit filed by
the Akal Security employees and is looking into the matter,"
said Steve Blando, deputy chief of public affairs for the U.S.
Marshals Service, in a prepared statement. "Since the litigation
is ongoing, it would be premature for the U.S. Marshals Service
to comment on the lawsuit at this time."
Bantly's three clients include two security officers who
still work at the San Francisco federal courthouse and one who
claims he was fired in retaliation for reporting security
breaches. The breaches listed in the complaint include a guard
having a sexual relationship with a judge's clerk, which is
against Akal policy, guards sharing prescription drugs and
guards working while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The two guards who still work at the courthouse claim they have
been passed over for assignments and suspended in retaliation
for reporting violations. Miller v. Akal Security Inc.,
09-489149 (S.F. Super. Ct.).
A similar lawsuit against Akal, which includes retaliation
and gender discrimination claims, is pending in Sacramento
County Superior Court. Eggar v. Akal Security Inc.,
06-1208 (Sacramento Super. Ct.).
Bantly said she was previously unaware of the Sacramento
lawsuit but that after reading the complaint she found that "the
allegations are eerily similar."
One of the defendants in the Sacramento suit is Larry
Homenick, a contract officer who, according to one source, is
one of the Akal employees conducting the internal investigation
in San Francisco.
Jill P. Telfer, a sole practitioner, and Daniel G. O'Donnell,
of Clancey Doyle & O'Donnell, both in Sacramento, represent the
Sacramento plaintiffs, who are all former Akal employees.
Akal settled a similar lawsuit brought by its employees at a
military base in Kansas in 2007 for $18 million after an
investigation by the Justice Department.
rebecca_beyer@dailyjournal.com
