Doing it’s job in protecting an industry already working on improving a reputation tarnished by “a few bad apples”. This one clearly had a worm, and didn’t make it to market.
As a former employee of Ms. Whatley I was appalled to learn of her dubious past. Once more is she is working as an independent contractor, yeah right, for Mo Docs a newly formed 383. They sell malpractice to doctors in Mo.
What is particularly intersting is that the higher ups are aware of her past. They have allowed her to run appointments with sales agents which is a direct violation of insurance laws. One has to question the integrity of those running this new company. My prediction is that when the state is finished their investigation there will be some answering to be done.
Anyone intersted in learning more, please feel free to call the DOI. Thanks.
I know Rochelle, and I find her to be honest to core, she will not try to sell anything if she thinks the person does not need it. She is also a warm and caring person.We only have and want the window dressing of christian ethics instead of the core values like forgiveness. We in this society should learn to forgive, she paid her dues. I would trust her
and would have no problem working with her or for her. The comments on this page are small minded and politicaly motivated, that is obvious. Give em Hell Rochell.
With just a little bit of research it is not hard to find out further information regarding Ms. Whatley\’s conviction and form your own opinion. Personally, I feel that even minimal involvement in a scheme such as this one indicates a moral flexibility that I would be uncomfortable with in a trust-based industry such as insurance.
I understand that Ms. Whatley claims that she had no knowledge of the events that led to her conviction. This seems a bit far-fetched in my opinon, considering that court documents indicate her as the president and sole shareholder of the business entity involved in this case.
I notice in my research that Ms. Whatley has a brother named Calvin. That certainly is interesting considering that this thread is originated by an individual named Calvin. Coincidence? You decide.
Regardless of how good of a person Ms. Whatley is now or the dues she has paid, the bottom line is that there exists a law that specifically indicates that an Insurance company may NOT EMPLOY any persons convicted of a felony (it does not include provisions regarding the individual\’s personal growth or whether or not someone needs what she is selling).
Her employers are circumventing this law by keeping her on the payroll as a contractor? Their willingness to bend the rules regarding this very specific regulation speaks volumes to the integrity of the company, and her willingness to participate in this scenario demonstrates that despite the opinions of her friends, she may NOT be \”honest to the core.\”
The question here is not regarding Ms. Whatley\’s values or the quality of her person. It is truly regarding whether she is legally ENTITLED to an insurance producer\’s license. Even people with bad credit histories need to work at rebuilding their reputation with lenders. Ms. Whatley apparently applied for this license only months after being released from supervision. If her employer chooses not to uphold the Insurance guidelines to the letter of the law, I am comforted to hear that the regulating body of the insurance industry is taking the opportunity to do so.
Perhaps it is time for Ms. Whatley to consider a career outside the insurance industry.
Congratulations to the Department of Insurance on upholding their decision!!!! This woman does not deserve a license to sell insurance no matter how nice she thinks she is. For more details on her and her prior and current endeavors, click the link: http://www.oa.mo.gov/ahc/case/Whatley05-1074DI.JJK.doc
I truly should have no reason to care at all about the fate of rochelle whatley or the company she is a so called contractor for. I guess that I am just personally offended by the entire scenario. It is certainly shocking to learn that your boss has been convicted of a felony and as a result she is not even legally qualified to perform the job she is supervising, nor is she legally qualified to be employed by the company, and therefore has to call herself a contractor in order to provide herself a legal loophole. Who do you have to *&%# to get treatment like that??? I can’t even begin to detail the frustrations I felt on a daily basis while working with this woman, but suffice it to say that I truly believe that there is no valid reason to grant this woman an insurance license.
For the emasculated little boy that identifies himself as a former employee (obviously you were incompetent and terminated), the mere fact that you made your absurd comments regarding “who do you have to **** to get the job”, in and of itself speaks to your pathetic existence as a human being and the fact that you have not yet matured into manhood. You are clearly a person of minimal education; low self-esteem, lower socio-economic status and you probably have mommy/daddy issues, as you believe that most decisions involve a penis. Please note that I am describing the intelligence of your post with the same juvenile, name-calling, lack of substance rhetoric that you used in your post, as it is obvious that this is the level at which you function and reason. Stick to sweeping out warehouses and looking at the Victoria’s Secret catalogs. In the event that you have grown up any, and the off chance that you can actually read, please read my reply to Dr. Victor.
Doing it’s job in protecting an industry already working on improving a reputation tarnished by “a few bad apples”. This one clearly had a worm, and didn’t make it to market.
The only reputation that is tarnished is the corrupt system that we live in. I fill Ms. Whatley should be given a chance.
As a former employee of Ms. Whatley I was appalled to learn of her dubious past. Once more is she is working as an independent contractor, yeah right, for Mo Docs a newly formed 383. They sell malpractice to doctors in Mo.
What is particularly intersting is that the higher ups are aware of her past. They have allowed her to run appointments with sales agents which is a direct violation of insurance laws. One has to question the integrity of those running this new company. My prediction is that when the state is finished their investigation there will be some answering to be done.
Anyone intersted in learning more, please feel free to call the DOI. Thanks.
I know Rochelle, and I find her to be honest to core, she will not try to sell anything if she thinks the person does not need it. She is also a warm and caring person.We only have and want the window dressing of christian ethics instead of the core values like forgiveness. We in this society should learn to forgive, she paid her dues. I would trust her
and would have no problem working with her or for her. The comments on this page are small minded and politicaly motivated, that is obvious. Give em Hell Rochell.
With just a little bit of research it is not hard to find out further information regarding Ms. Whatley\’s conviction and form your own opinion. Personally, I feel that even minimal involvement in a scheme such as this one indicates a moral flexibility that I would be uncomfortable with in a trust-based industry such as insurance.
I understand that Ms. Whatley claims that she had no knowledge of the events that led to her conviction. This seems a bit far-fetched in my opinon, considering that court documents indicate her as the president and sole shareholder of the business entity involved in this case.
I notice in my research that Ms. Whatley has a brother named Calvin. That certainly is interesting considering that this thread is originated by an individual named Calvin. Coincidence? You decide.
Regardless of how good of a person Ms. Whatley is now or the dues she has paid, the bottom line is that there exists a law that specifically indicates that an Insurance company may NOT EMPLOY any persons convicted of a felony (it does not include provisions regarding the individual\’s personal growth or whether or not someone needs what she is selling).
Her employers are circumventing this law by keeping her on the payroll as a contractor? Their willingness to bend the rules regarding this very specific regulation speaks volumes to the integrity of the company, and her willingness to participate in this scenario demonstrates that despite the opinions of her friends, she may NOT be \”honest to the core.\”
The question here is not regarding Ms. Whatley\’s values or the quality of her person. It is truly regarding whether she is legally ENTITLED to an insurance producer\’s license. Even people with bad credit histories need to work at rebuilding their reputation with lenders. Ms. Whatley apparently applied for this license only months after being released from supervision. If her employer chooses not to uphold the Insurance guidelines to the letter of the law, I am comforted to hear that the regulating body of the insurance industry is taking the opportunity to do so.
Perhaps it is time for Ms. Whatley to consider a career outside the insurance industry.
Congratulations to the Department of Insurance on upholding their decision!!!! This woman does not deserve a license to sell insurance no matter how nice she thinks she is. For more details on her and her prior and current endeavors, click the link:
http://www.oa.mo.gov/ahc/case/Whatley05-1074DI.JJK.doc
I truly should have no reason to care at all about the fate of rochelle whatley or the company she is a so called contractor for. I guess that I am just personally offended by the entire scenario. It is certainly shocking to learn that your boss has been convicted of a felony and as a result she is not even legally qualified to perform the job she is supervising, nor is she legally qualified to be employed by the company, and therefore has to call herself a contractor in order to provide herself a legal loophole. Who do you have to *&%# to get treatment like that??? I can’t even begin to detail the frustrations I felt on a daily basis while working with this woman, but suffice it to say that I truly believe that there is no valid reason to grant this woman an insurance license.
For the emasculated little boy that identifies himself as a former employee (obviously you were incompetent and terminated), the mere fact that you made your absurd comments regarding “who do you have to **** to get the job”, in and of itself speaks to your pathetic existence as a human being and the fact that you have not yet matured into manhood. You are clearly a person of minimal education; low self-esteem, lower socio-economic status and you probably have mommy/daddy issues, as you believe that most decisions involve a penis. Please note that I am describing the intelligence of your post with the same juvenile, name-calling, lack of substance rhetoric that you used in your post, as it is obvious that this is the level at which you function and reason. Stick to sweeping out warehouses and looking at the Victoria’s Secret catalogs. In the event that you have grown up any, and the off chance that you can actually read, please read my reply to Dr. Victor.