Chapter 6 - THE PERSON LEAKING PENNY’S PRIVATE INFORMATION WAS THE SUPERVISOR WHO CARRIED JAMIE INTO THE BALLROOM
Her name was Colleen Avery.
Thirty-two.
Assistant housekeeping supervisor.
She was the woman who had carried Jamie into the staff meeting.
Penny had not thought much about her afterward.
Colleen had followed Marlene’s instruction.
That was bad enough.
But not everyone who follows a bad order is equally responsible for everything around it.
Then communications review found messages.
Colleen to a freelance gossip reporter:
You want the real story? She hid the baby behind towel racks for weeks.
Another:
Vale personally stopped firing. Ask why.
Another:
She’s not some innocent struggling mom. She broke safety rules and got rewarded.
The reporter replied:
Do you have photos?
Colleen sent one.
Jamie’s crib behind the shelving.
Penny saw the photograph and nearly dropped the printout.
“Who took this?”
Independent counsel answered:
“Metadata suggests Colleen’s phone.”
“When?”
“The morning of the staff meeting.”
“She went down there before bringing Jamie upstairs?”
“Yes.”
That meant the public confrontation had been staged more deliberately than Penny realized.
Colleen had discovered the crib.
Photographed it.
Then told Marlene.
Marlene ordered the entire staff meeting used to make an example.
Why?
Retaliation?
Maybe.
Investigators found Penny’s prior scheduling email.
She had written:
I understand operational needs, but current shifts leave me without safe childcare. Is there any emergency family program or transfer option available?
Penny had specifically asked about assistance.
Marlene replied:
No company program is available for personal childcare.
False.
Two days later, Marlene forwarded Penny’s email to Colleen:
Watch her. She has excuse-maker energy.
Colleen replied:
She’s always sneaking off on breaks.
Marlene:
Find out why.
There.
They watched.
Then found Jamie.
Instead of privately addressing safety, they planned humiliation.
Colleen’s leak after the fact showed resentment.
Why did she care?
Her own messages revealed.
Colleen:
I’ve covered doubles for years without getting special treatment.
Her sister:
Maybe ask for help too?
Colleen:
That’s not how it works here.
Exactly.
Scarcity had turned employees against one another.
If nobody expects fairness, any exception looks like favoritism.
Penny understood that.
It did not excuse leaking Jamie’s photo.
But she understood.
Colleen was placed on leave and later terminated after the investigation substantiated privacy violations, retaliation, and improper disclosure of internal information.
She did not go to prison.
No need.
Then she filed a complaint alleging Lake Haven fired her for whistleblowing about a safety violation.
That could not simply be dismissed because Sandro disliked her.
Outside counsel handled.
Colleen had indeed reported a real safety concern.
Penny had brought an infant into an unauthorized work area.
Protected whistleblowing and retaliatory leaking were separate.
The company had to show termination was based on conduct beyond reporting.
Messages helped.
Good.
Penny watched the process with complicated feelings.
“I don’t want her destroyed.”
Sandro looked at her.
“She made your child tabloid content.”
“I know.”
“And?”
“I still don’t want her life over.”
“It won’t be.”
“You can make sure she never works in Cleveland.”
“I could attempt.”
“That is exactly what I mean.”
Sandro went still.
Old reputation.
Ventresca.
Men lowered voices.
Penny continued:
“If she broke policy, handle policy.”
“Don’t make her afraid of your name.”
He stared.
“You assume I would.”
“Would you?”
Long pause.
“Once.”
Honest.
“And now?”
“I am trying not to.”
Good.
The company defended its employment decision through normal channels.
No private pressure.
Colleen eventually settled certain employment claims confidentially? Better: investigation concluded with agency finding no basis? We don't need final yet.
Then Penny’s own disciplinary outcome.
The independent safety review concluded:
Bringing Jamie into the laundry area violated policy and created unacceptable risk even though Penny had taken precautions.
Penny received formal written discipline.
Not termination.
Why not?
Mitigating factors:
repeated denied accommodation requests,
false information from management about available support,
no prior safety violations,
prompt cooperation,
and evidence that management had failed to provide accessible reporting/assistance channels.
She hated signing the warning.
Sandro was not in room.
Good.
Independent HR.
Penny read.
Then signed.
No special treatment.
That mattered deeply.
Then childcare.
The emergency fund covered six months while Lake Haven designed longer-term solution.
An employee survey showed Penny was not alone.
Eleven workers had quit in two years citing childcare.
Seven currently struggled with unpredictable shifts.
Two regularly left older children unsupervised after school.
One kitchen employee paid nearly half her take-home salary to childcare.
The estate did not need to become daycare company.
But Lake Haven’s size and remote location created workforce reality.
After legal, insurance, and operational review, the company converted an unused administrative wing into a licensed childcare center operated by an independent provider.
Not inside hazardous work areas.
Separate entrance.
Qualified staff.
Employees paid income-adjusted fees subsidized partly by existing benefit budget.
Not free for everyone.
Not named after Penny.
She insisted.
When Sandro jokingly suggested “Fairchild Center” in a planning meeting, she said:
“Absolutely not.”
He had not been joking entirely.
He never suggested again.
Then Penny received another offer.
Laundry lead.
Higher pay.
Regular schedule.
She declined.
Sandro heard through HR.
He asked:
“Why?”
“I don’t want a promotion attached to scandal.”
“Your performance qualifies.”
“Maybe.”
“Then?”
“I want six months normal.”
That answer.
Normal.
He respected.
Then something changed outside work.
Sandro began arriving less.
The audit was ending.
Permanent controls installed.
Independent HR reporting.
Payroll edits required dual review.
Vendor conflicts disclosed.
Employee assistance administered externally.
Marlene’s criminal/civil financial issues referred to authorities and insurers.
Lake Haven no longer needed the owner pretending to be Mr. Vale.
Penny should have been relieved.
Instead, she noticed when his car was not there.
That annoyed her.
One Friday, Sandro entered laundry wearing no inspector badge.
Just coat.
“Last day?”
“Of daily review.”
“You’ll disappear back into billionaire cave?”
“Probably.”
She smiled despite herself.
Then:
“Good.”
His face stayed neutral.
“Good?”
“You being here makes people nervous.”
“You?”
“Yes.”
“Because I own the place?”
“Because you look like you’re about to interrogate furniture.”
He almost laughed.
Then became serious.
“Penny.”
“No.”
He stopped.
She had known question before he asked.
“Nothing happens while I work here.”
“I know.”
“Good.”
“I was going to say something else.”
She flushed.
“What?”
“Eli wants to speak to you.”
“Oh.”
Sandro’s mouth moved.
Tiny.
She hated him.
Eli appeared with an envelope.
Again.
Penny groaned.
“No.”
He handed it.
Not eighty dollars.
A receipt.
Donation:
$80 to the Cleveland Youth Food Pantry.
In honor of Tom Mercer.
Eli said:
“You told me I could pay you when I was thirty and rich.”
“You are neither.”
“I got paid from youth snow-clearing program.”
“So you donated your first eighty?”
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“Because you wouldn’t take it.”
Penny started crying.
Eli panicked.
“Why are you crying?”
“I’m tired.”
Sandro looked away to give privacy.
Eli said:
“I also bought dry socks.”
“Good.”
Then Penny hugged him.
He tolerated approximately two seconds.
Enough.
Later, Sandro stood alone near the service exit.
Penny passed.
“Thank you.”
He looked.
“For what?”
“Not paying him back for me.”
“I thought that was stupid.”
“It probably was.”
Then:
“Still.”
She walked away.
Sandro watched.
Nothing happened.
Exactly as promised.
May you like
But six months later, Penny would walk into his office with a resignation letter.
And that would change what both of them were allowed to ask.
Related Stories
