Proving a sequence of anti-social behavior involves a high word-count. Rules of balanced reporting mean the person engaging in the behavior must be fairly represented, the context and specifics of events documented, and similar events reported over and over to avoid generalizations about someone's actions. This section opens up some of the detailed cataloguing of events within Workers Lab.

​

​

Standards of evidence

​

The highest standard of evidence of any wrongdoing is a verifiable audio or visual recording of it happening. In California, where Workers Lab is largely based, it is illegal to record dialogue without all parties' permission. Adrian Haro refused this permission.

So, the next best standard is contemporaneous email exchanges with the people involved.

 

Imagine you were in a meeting of four people yesterday. One of the participants emails the follow up decisions and actions which includes verbatim quotes of you making offensive statements. How would you react? 

​

You might deny saying it, or apologize, or point out it was supposed to be a joke. But if you worked through the email, without reacting to the record of your statement? That suggests (a) everyone present knows you said it (b) it didn't register as troublesome because the culture in which you work regards statements like that as routine.

​

Over 18 months, I have built up multiple emails like this with Adrian Haro, CEO of the Workers Lab. A selection are available on this page. 

​

Adrian has subsequently told the lawyers he now refers to as "My legal team" that he doesn't recollect some of the more contentious statements in these emails. His attorneys appear to have accepted that as proof those events didn't happen (it's hard to know; their findings are concealed). They have not explained why he then didn't react to a record of the statements at the time, or why he continued month-by-month funding of someone repeatedly emailing him records of such statements if he wasn't saying those things.

​

​

Tone of emails

​

How do you frame contentious events when writing about them in a way you hope will make them stop? Try to see the other's point of view? Let your frustrations show? Apologize for raising the matter? Try to emphasize what’s going well? Explain the consequences? Getting the tone wrong can provoke one of Adrian's rages which would mean having to cancel my To Do list for the next day to placate him. 

​

And when it came time to escalate awareness to TWL's directors? I don't know why they won't just talk with me, I have to assume they have preconceptions about me - possibly fed by Adrian - that an email must deflate ..... if I can only figure out what those notions are. And I am journalist enough to realize the enormous reputational risks Adrian's behavior causes for TWL, and associated organizations. They seem oblivious to the havoc he could cause, should I try to guess why and argue from that standpoint?

​

I oscillated between communication styles over 18 months. Adrian has labelled me "paranoid" for raising worries about what he might do next. I have been told I am "passive aggressive" for beginning to raise a point, realizing it was likely to provoke an attack, and backing down. When browsing these emails, remember; I had to capture a string of unwelcome, often bewildering, events while fantastically busy on my other duties. I did get the tone wrong at times. 

​

Several of the emails are too long. But they are often distillations of raw events. Email 1D is an example where I (a) recorded verbatim what was said by Adrian at a meeting immediately the meeting ended, emailing it to myself to create a timestamped record (b) waited until next day to email him a sanitized version that I hoped would avoid further rages (c) tried to use the ensuing conversation to move the project along tangibly. As the emails show, it didn't work. 

 

 

Changes to emails

​

Emails linked from this page have been amended slightly. This is where it is necessary to:

​

• Preserve confidentiality: Emails have been selected because they reveal little about TWL's ways of working outside of my experience and opinions. Specific information about their processes or finances has been redacted. 

• Protect the innocent: Many organizations and people are involved in the overall Beyond Jobs project and mentioned in emails. They are emphatically not part of this account and have had no knowledge of the extent of problems within Workers Lab. They should not be tainted by association; names have been redacted.

• Protect staffers: Some other members of TWL staff witnessed Adrian's behavior and seemed occasionally complicit in it. I have chosen to mask their identities. If your boss behaves like this, you shouldn't be blamed for assuming it's OK to do so.

• Conceal contact details: This site is not intended as a resource for trolls or 'bots. Email addresses and phone numbers have been overwritten.

• Profanity: Adrian can be fond of the "F" word when raging. To avoid triggering web filters, the word is asterisked out.

 

Some minor typo's have been corrected and email chains have been put in chronological order for easy reading. Originals can be provided for verification.

​

​

Sample Emails

 

Issues with Adrian broadly divided into five phases. But first, some essential background.

 

 

BACKGROUND: Our Financial Dependence on TWL

 

There is a pressing vulnerability underlying Adrian's threats to stop TWL's funding when he is angry. Throughout 2022 and into 2023, Adrian kept telling me to let him handle our fundraising. This made sense, TWL have a full-time fundraiser and a better brand than us. And I badly needed to focus on our  launches and technology. 

 

But my concerns about Adrian's volatility and the risks to our operation intensified. I suggested we switched to collaborative approaches; TWL open doors to philanthropies, but I or my team then present our work for ourselves. Adrian gave a qualified Yes, but then insisted we could only do this if I used a slidedeck compiled by his communications consultant to explain our project. 

 

That deck ended up taking months to arrive. It was then agreed - including by Adrian - to be inadequate. At that point he insisted she be given more time to create another. This effectively paused any independent fundraising for several more months. That muddled situation has dragged on through 2023. Funders will want to see progress in our regional launches, supporting them has to be my priority. With my time consumed by launches, tech. work, and managing Adrian-related issues; fundraising keeps getting bumped to next month.

 

In Spring 2023, one of TWL's lawyers denied Adrian ever said "leave the funding to me" while another assured me Adrian had convincingly explained that he didn't hold up our outreach while he took it on himself to fix our messaging. I compiled a sample of email exchanges from August 2022 to January 2023 which made the untruthfulness of those statements clear. [EMAIL 1A].

 

 

PHASE 1: Problems Emerge

 

April 2022: My Concerns Crystalize

 

After several months working with TWL I was frustrated at what I saw as the slowness of their way of working and lack of structure. I didn't sense anything malicious, just people who had come from an unrelated background not grasping how organized and focused ambitious non-profits must be. Verbal suggestions didn't seem to be registering. So I put my thoughts on the culture gap between us into a memo, stressing I was offering "friendly suggestions". [EMAIL 1B, April 13, 2022]

 

This led to a nearly 90-minute meeting in which Adrian, then two of his staffers took turns to criticize my lack of gratitude and perceived hostility. I recall being told I was exerting my "white privilege" but did not record that at the time.

 

 

May 2022: "I Must Apologize for You"

 

Adrian's workstyle, and my ethnicity, clashed again the following month. One of my existing (pre-TWL) funders had set me up with a meeting with another large funder. As a courtesy, I suggested inviting a TWL staffer known to that funder. He invited Adrian. Adrian then took over the meeting, making factually inaccurate statements about us and ignoring the agenda previously constructed by his staffers. I felt the vital session turned into an incoherent mess.

 

Afterwards Adrian told me that during the meeting I had exhibited aggression to one of the staff at the funder, a woman of color. I said if that was the case, I would immediately email an apology. He told me not to "They don't want to hear from you" and insisted only he could smooth things over. Wary of provoking another pile-on, I acquiesced. [EMAIL 1C - May 13, 2022]

 

 

August 2022: Recording a Fit of Temper

 

The gulf in our workstyles continued into summer 2022. Adrian began to exhibit periodic bouts of temper when he appeared incensed that I was not doing things as he wanted. He would threaten to immediately, cut our funding if I did not apologize to him to his satisfaction as a top priority. Email  1D, [Aug 2022] is an example of the groveling emails required to try getting us back on track. I did try to find common ground in these exchanges, offering pacifiers and concessions. Adrian responded to this email a few days later proposing we talk the next day.

 

The drag Adrian's behavior places on our operation is illustrated in [EMAIL 1E - August 15, 2022]. Around this time, Adrian became convinced he could see that I didn't really want to partner with TWL. So, a meeting was dedicated to working through an agenda that he put together around what I must agree to if he was to be satisfied I was sincere. No-one else wrote up what was agreed, so I did it a few days later. My final point that I had concerns about TWL's execution, and would appreciate a comparable meeting to address those, was ignored. 

​

​

January 2023: "We Need Your Help"

 

By the new year, I felt Adrian was trapped in paralysis-by-analysis; constantly needing to hear that I really badly wanted to work for him rather than progressing the project. At the start of 2023, I wrote with a heartfelt appeal that we put differences aside and TWL help us in ways that aligned with what we needed to do for delivery. [EMAIL 1G - January 13, 2023]. There was no significant response.

 

 

 

February 2023: Chicago Emerges as a Priority

 

The email above records how Adrian insisted his board would not fund my accommodation to work in our two most promising launch cities. (I was not seeking funding for my time which is unpaid, just for a hotel.) They needed each city to fund a project manager of their own first. But that didn't apply to Chicago where, I learned progressively, TWL appeared to be paying the New America think tank to launch our platform. 

 

[EMAIL 1H - February 13, 2023] captures one of my attempts to explain what I regarded as the perversity of funding people without the expertise required to launch our markets in a city expressing no interest, particularly when cities that were demonstrably keen couldn't be served until I had done consultancy in Canada to earn the funding for a visit. Adrian declined to accept this was indicative of any funding problem.

 

 

 

February 2023: "But What are You Telling me to do?"

 

My ethnicity remained an issue throughout this period. I happen to be white, Adrian and his lieutenants I was working with identify as Latino or biracial. As a Brit, there will be sensitivities around race in America that I don't instinctively understand; I tried to learn from TWL's inputs about this. 

 

But their inputs have included elevating a minor word flub in one of my countless presentations into evidence that I needed constant oversight. (For the record: I referred to "selling people" rather than "selling peoples' labor" when answering a question after the pitch.)  [EMAIL 1I - exchange starting on February 15, 2023] is an example of this gray area around race at TWL. As I set out for a self-funded project trip to one of our cities, it tells me my ethnicity can be a problem but won't specify anything specific I should do to mitigate that.

 

Was I being supported by a young TWL staffer, copying Adrian, or pointlessly criticized by someone who had witnessed his boss making statements that I needed supervision at meetings because of my ethnicity? I don't know. I don't doubt his sincerity, but the email gives further insight into the nuances of working within TWL.

 

 

 

PHASE 2: Filing a Formal Complaint

 

March 2023: "Nothing Else has Stopped this Behavior"

 

By March 2023, I could see no end in sight to the destabilization and lack of collaboration. Seeing no other options, I filed a formal complaint [DOCUMENT 2A - March 13, 2023] via Adrian (there is no designated point of contact for grantees independent of the CEO at TWL). With hindsight, I think the complaint was muddled and too long - extending into how TWL could make sure this behavior never happened to another grantee and how they could help rebuild our reputation given lack of momentum in the last year. But it was written under pressure with a lot going on. 

 

Concerned that Adrian would immediately retaliate or go into yet another time-consuming rage, I sent a side email - possibly misjudged - intended to tamp down his anger or actions. (His lawyers later incorporated this into the complaint.) [EMAIL 2B - March 13, 2023].

 

 

 

March 2023: Legal Action for Extortion Threatened

 

I expected my complaint to provoke dialogue with a TWL director or advisor who would then act as a mediator, getting everyone focused on productively undoing damage to the project. Instead, I received a letter from a Chicago boutique law firm saying they were investigating and asking for an interview. They pointed out I could co-fund third-party mediation as an alternative if I wished (we don't have the funds) but otherwise they were the only option for resolution. 

 

They also said my suggested plan for refocusing resources on the project and warning I may need to go public about events amounted to “a number of financial, professional and personal demands, coupled with threats….” which could lead to legal action for extortion by TWL. [EMAIL 2C - March 24, 2023]

 

 

 

April 2023: Lawyers in the Driving Seat

 

From that point on, lawyers constantly acted as a buffer between TWL and my side. Aside from the attorney who threatened me, there was her colleague leading their investigation, and a third who now appeared in all my meetings with TWL. My questions about funding deadlines and other matters were now deferred to lawyers.

 

I received frustratingly contradictory emails about TWL's intentions from the attorneys, attempts to get clarification from Adrian were referred back to the lawyer who couldn't see contradictions in an email telling me both: (a) TWL were committed to funding through to end of 2023 and (b) TWL would decide next month whether to proceed with the project at all. [EMAIL 2D - April 14, 2023]

 

​

 

May 2023: The Investigation Concludes

 

After a round of interviews with Adrian, other TWL staff (I think), and me, a final report into the investigation was produced. I assumed I would get a copy, with redactions. That was denied. My request for a written summary of their findings was likewise declined. But I was granted a debrief conversation with one of the lawyers. 

 

I wrote that dialogue up afterwards to capture: The focus of investigation had not been "Is there a problem with TWL's workplace culture to be tackled?" but "Did these specific events happen and if so, are there legal risks to TWL from this complaint?" (I had said in the complaint I believed California's anti-workplace-bullying law had been broken but knew I didn't have standing to sue.)

 

My complaint itemized many emails sent or received by TWL that evidenced the complained-of behavior. I thought the lawyers would request those emails from TWL. They didn't. However, I had forwarded the investigating attorney four emails evidencing some of the complained-of behavior after my interview with him. Adrian had told the investigation he now "didn't recollect" events unchallenged by him or other meeting participants in an email in the days following the events.  

 

The lawyer seemed to accept this as evidence the events didn't happen. (As with everything about this investigation, it's hard to know what was accepted because it was so untransparent.) I offered co-operation if he wanted to reopen his investigation after re-seeing my evidence. He didn't. This is encapsulated in the exchange over several weeks between one of the lawyers and I. [EMAIL 2E - May 10, 2023]

 

 

 

PHASE 3: Quiet Summer

 

Around June, the lawyer who had been chairing my weekly meetings with TWL disappeared. But they were still present in spirit, Adrian took to referring to "My Legal Team" to whom decisions had to be referred. But summer 2023 was comparatively productive, Adrian seemed to be on his best behavior.  I read that as a tacit sign he knew he had behaved badly, was unusually lucky to have had  such supportive investigators, and was quietly working to make amends. 

 

Funding decisions were still month-to-month, precarious, and often announced past previously agreed deadlines. But this could just be disarray rather than willful desire to destabilize. Work continued on our city launches with Adrian running a Chicago operation.

 

Me: "It feels like we should be having a clear-the-air conversation?" 

Adrian: "We can't. The lawyers." 

Project meeting May or June 2023, [EMAIL 4B].

 

 

 

PHASE 4: Renormalization of the Behavior

 

September 2023: "It's Your Fault for Doing What I Said"

 

Something changed towards the end of summer. Adrian seemed to become more assertive again, almost as if he had been let off the hook somehow? I became aware of the mood change in late August during the customary ritual of reminding him we needed to know whether funds due to us in September would materialize. He said they probably wouldn’t and told partners of ours who TWL funds the same. He explained, "You are just a vendor (to TWL), this is your problem, it's nothing to do with me".

 

I pointed out he had specifically instructed me to make my organization financially dependent on TWL and thwarted our attempts to break out of that. "You didn't have to follow what I said, you had agency" was the response. [EMAIL 4A - August 28, 2023]

 

 

 

October 2023: Attempt at a Reset (Again)

 

The September crisis was averted but "vendorgate" continued to be a theme. We were no longer partners, grantees, or incubatees; just suppliers who were to do as we were told by TWL, accepting what funds they had available. By October, there was worse news, TWL faced a crisis of its own and looked unlikely to be able to support our activity in November because there would be nothing left after they had covered their own establishment costs. 

 

I considered prioritizing their spend on lawyers, consultants, a sluggish Chicago operation, and other costs a mistake and put together a (possibly overly detailed)  ten-point attempt to change their minds, shared with a TWL director and one of their advisors [EMAIL 4B - October 23, 2023] There was no significant response.

 

 

 

October 2023: "There will be no Insurrection."

 

Adrian became enthused about the launch in Chicago which he was leading without our involvement. He was convinced transactions could start at the end of November. This required us to build duplicate versions of our platform to operate in Central Time. (We handle each worker's time with unusual sophistication. Because of month-by-month funding uncertainty we had held off major tech. projects including making the system multi-timezone compatible.)

 

I argued repeatedly that the operation in Chicago wasn't as ready as Adrian believed, that diverting our minimal and unsteady resources to a new region would add unacceptable risk, and they didn't need their own platform yet. It went into a 3,500 word plea that we be allowed to focus on our core operations. Adrian rebutted it with one sentence, [EMAIL 4C, October 27, 2023]. 

 

This episode reveals the dammed-if-you-do, dammed-if-you-don't aspect of working with this sort of behavior. I could have declined to build Adrian's Chicago version, but then would have crossed a line into refusing to comply with a funder's instructions.  I can imagine how he might exploit that. Our Central Time platform is now a precarious reality but badged with TWL's logo because we will not put our brand on such a reckless piece of work.

 

 

 

November 2023: "You Can't Meet Without Us"

 

Late in fall 2023, Adrian unexpectedly offered to replace one of our existing partners in funding our work in one of the launch cities, (his possible motivation became clear later, see below). But we were still simply "vendors" to a TWL program. Once again, his position came with inconsistencies.

 

Launching labor markets like ours in any region is a challenge. The work is led by keen, capable, but relatively inexperienced people in each case. I wanted to instigate weekly "Astronauts" support meetings for our launch managers to share concerns, vulnerabilities, and ideas around their work. Adrian decided he or, as a concession, his nominee must attend because, as a funder, that is his entitlement.

 

Adrian is adept at weaponizing invented weaknesses in people, I felt couldn't invite others to open up in any session to be relayed to him. This minor issue flared into threats from Adrian to - once again - arbitrarily cut our funding and - even more worryingly - renege on written commitments he had made around the contractual arrangements of some of our younger team members. We eventually cancelled the support meetings to placate him. [EMAIL 4D, November 27, 2023]

​

​

​

PHASE 5: Appropriation and Reneging

 

December 2023: Airbrushed Out

 

We developed the "Good Gig Work" program within America's public workforce system before TWL knew we existed. Our pre-Covid groundlaying - not any initative by TWL - has given us robust launch momentum in three regions. Adrian has obstructed and slowed our work in so many ways. Despite all this, the move to position the initiative as a TWL program to which we are simply suppliers continues. In December it became external.

 

TWL have previously sought our buy-in to their public announcements about our program. But now they are making external announcements as if the project is all theirs. A lengthy release on December 13, 2023 makes no reference to us, our partner cities, or anything other than TWL and Adrian's assumed leadership. This is now worrying: I have to show multiple parties what we might be capable of if we didn't have to absorb Adrian's behavior but he is using TWL's reach and brand to position us as bit players. 

 

This is an example of the "Why didn't you say?" tactic that can be a feature of behavior like Adrian's. I could email him asking for a mention in his blogpost; depending on his mood he may agree, probably grudgingly, as a favor. But I have to focus on the major consequences of his actions (see email 4C above). In case he inserts us into this article after learning about this site, the original piece is shown in document 5A.

 

 

 

December 2023: Written Commitments Reneged

 

At the end of 2023, a written commitment from Adrian to pay a backlog of deferred payments by end of 2023 was suddenly shelved at the last moment with no explanation, or warning. A staffer was left to inform us the scheduled, invoiced, payment would be half paid with the rest to follow at some unspecified point. 

 

Days later, another fineagle was suddenly communicated. Adrian had approached one of our launch partner organizations and offered to take over funding the next stage of our work in their region from them. This was without any discussion with us. Initially it seemed harmless, if pointless; the launch partner is far better resourced than TWL.

 

In early November, Adrian committed - in writing again - to paying that sum also by end of 2023. On December 21, it became clear he was suddenly making that conditional on me signing a contract agreeing that he could cut our funding at his sole discretion if he felt I had committed any "microaggression" towards a member of TWL staff.

 

There has been no reply to the Christmas period emails about this by  [EMAIL 5B: December 11 and 27, 2023.]

​

>  TWL's Response