Rosa Vides-Espinoza

Human Resources Coordinator

Commerce Casino

Rosa Vides-Espinoza is a human resources employee at Commerce Casino in Los Angeles. 

In 2024, Ms Vides-Espinoza and fellow HR employees engaged in intimidation tactics and retaliation, targeting an employee for termination. Their conduct was a key source of charges filed by a senior investigator with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the California Civil Rights Division for violations of state and federal law.

That former employee is the author of this website and is sharing these experiences for the  protection of other employees. 

In March and April of 2024, the employee reported misconduct by a business executive, including retaliation as well as verbal and psychological abuse which the employee believes violated company policy and rises to the level of the state’s definitions of workplace violence. This included an extensive written report submitted on April 18 to HR manager Bernadette Palacios. Ms Vides-Espinoza and HR manager Iveta Vardanyan dismissed the reports, claiming lack of evidence.

On June 17, the employee experienced verbal abuse from the executive in front of several others, resulting in shaking, difficulty breathing, heart palpitations, disorientation, and loss of sensation in extremities. A medic was sent to the employee’s work station to provide emergency care. The medic observed that the employee’s blood pressure had elevated to a critical level, placing the employee at risk of heart attack or stroke, and recommended that the employee be sent in an ambulance to the emergency room at the hospital.

On the week of June 17-21, staff members reported confidentially to the employee that two HR investigators, Ms Vides-Espinoza and Ms Palacios, had ordered staff members into an interrogation room one at a time on successive days and pressured them to make negative statements about the employee. Staff members described the experience as intimidation. Staff members reported that the interrogations included the following questions:

• Has [the employee] ever shared with you that [they have] a disability?

• Does this make you feel uncomfortable?

• Can you think of any times [the employee]’s disability has made you feel uncomfortable?

• When staff members answered ‘no’, the HR employees rephrased the question several times as if to pressure staff to change their answers and elicit a ‘yes’.

On June 24, the employee emailed HR vice president Jose Garcia and HR director Heidi Townsend to report the intimidation tactics. Mr Garcia replied and instructed the employee to meet in his office on the morning of June 26.

On June 26 at 10am, the employee entered Mr Garcia’s office. Ms Vardanyan and Ms Palacios were seated at the conference table. Mr Garcia stated that they were conducting an investigation and he was required to leave the room. Ms Palacios served as stenographer while Ms Vardanyan conducted the interrogation. The employee stated that HR managers were pressuring staff members to make negative statements about the employee. Ms Vardanyan denied this. She then ordered the employee to reveal the names of the staff members who had reported the intimidation tactics, claiming that it was a violation of company policy for the staff members to have shared information from an HR interview - effectively contradicting her previous statement. The employee refused, stating that Ms Vardanyan and HR employees would retaliate against the staff members if their identities were known. Ms Verdanyan threatened the employee with termination for refusing. The employee again refused and stated that the interrogation would not continue until Mr Garcia had returned to the room. Several minutes later, Ms Vardanyan and Ms Palacios arrived at the employee's office with Mr Garcia, and the interrogation continued. Ms Vardanyan once again ordered the employee to reveal the names of the whistle blowers under threat of termination. The employee again refused. Ms Vardanyan repeated the threat a second time, instructing Ms Palacios to note in her transcription that the employee had repeatedly refused. Mr Garcia interrupted, stating that he had heard enough, dismissed Ms Vardanyan and Ms Palacios, and asked the employee to speak with attorneys. In total, the employee was under interrogation that day for approximately four hours.

This account is protected under California's Silenced No More Act.