Ashley Gjovik
  • Home
  • Contact
  • Updates (RSS)
  • Interviews & Press
  • Support
  • Ashley's Apple Saga
    • Gjovik v Apple (Legal)
    • About Ashley's Apple Saga
    • Termination Transcript
    • Justice at Apple
  • Saratoga Creek System
    • Clean Water Act Sixty Day Notice
    • Santa Clara Baylands
    • North Central Santa Clara Geology
    • Saratoga Creek & Bayside History
    • The Santa Clara Greenbelt
  • 3250 Scott Blvd (Chip Fab)
  • Triple Site
    • Triple Site (Superfund)
    • HAZWOPER Reading Room
  • South Bay/Boston Marsh
    • History of South Bay, South End, & Fort Point (19th-21st Century)
    • Boston History (Pre-19th Century)
    • The Hidden Hydrology of Boston & South End
    • South Bay Geotechnical Review
    • Geology of Boston
    • The Cesspool & Sewage Pollution
    • Sewer infrastructure and CSO Systems
    • South Bay Incinerator & Dump Site
    • Biological & Medical Hazards
    • Industrial History & Landfilling
    • Biota & Ecosystem
    • Declarations & Enforcement Actions
  • Journal of Ecology & Evolution

Apple Wants Me Sanctioned for Saying "Menstruation" on the Internet. Here Are My Responses.

2/20/2026

0 Comments

 
Apple filed an emergency letter with a federal court demanding sanctions, contempt, a restraining order on my speech, and deletion of my blog post and social media posts about my NLRB charges. They wanted an unrecorded phone call within 24 hours to make it happen. No motions, no evidence, no briefing, no court reporter, and no public visibility to what happens. Apple wanted my coworkers to know Apple was getting me called into detention with a Judge, but they didn't want anyone to see what was said or understand what the outcome was, other than it was all happening because Apple called me a "leaker" when I complained about work conditions and demanded that Apple be a better employer. 

Apple's lawyers even emailed me demanding I delete social media posts and blog posts that they wanted me to self-identify as "leaking" about work conditions. I told Apple's lawyers to eat rocks. Then they escalated to a federal court, accusing me of gross misconduct and saying I'm causing irreparable harm to Apple, and cited and quoted my NLRB charges against Apple alleging that Apple violated the NLRA.

Apple also repeatedly claimed that me complaining about Apple's intrusive requests, monitoring, questioning and "studies" of employee genital secretions was also Apple Confidential and suggested I was "breaching" court Orders (that's asking a court to hold me in contempt), and should be forced to delete my posts (that's sanctions/injunctive relief), and be ordered to stop "leaking" (that's a prior restraint gag order).

I, once again, told Apple's lawyers to eat rocks. 

During this period of time Apple accumulated three new NLRB charges like it was collecting Pokémon cards. 

​....
​

Read More
0 Comments

Apple Claims It Owns Its Employees' Cervical Mucus: A New NLRB Charge Reveals the Logical Endpoint of Corporate Confidentiality Abuse

2/16/2026

0 Comments

 
On February 16, 2026, I filed a new unfair labor practice charge against Apple Inc. with NLRB. The charge contains ten counts alleging violations of Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(4) of the National Labor Relations Act. The accompanying cover letter, complete with deposition transcript excerpts, paints a picture so extraordinary that it warrants serious attention from labor law practitioners, employment scholars, and anyone interested in the boundaries of corporate power over employees' bodies and speech.

The short version: Apple's lawyers designated an employee's deposition testimony about my own cervical mucus, ovulation, and menstrual cycle as Apple's confidential business information, then told me that if I disagreed, I could write Apple a memorandum explaining why my bodily secretions don't belong to the company. The long version is even worse.

Background: The Settlement That Should Have Ended This

My earlier charges (Case 32-CA-284428 and related cases) resulted in a General Counsel complaint and a national settlement agreement reached in April 2025. That settlement required Apple to rescind overbroad confidentiality policies that restricted employees' Section 7 rights, post a nationwide notice promising not to discipline employees for discussing working conditions, and agree not to enforce its definition of "Proprietary Information" to the extent it covered terms and conditions of employment. The settlement included a catch-all: Apple promised not to "in any like or related manner interfere with your rights under Section 7."

Critically, the settlement contained a self-executing default provision. Upon non-compliance, the Regional Director would reissue the October 2024 complaint, Apple's allegations would be deemed admitted, its answer withdrawn, and the Board could enter a full remedy order without trial. A Court of Appeals judgment could be entered ex parte. That provision matters for everything that follows.

​.....


Read More
0 Comments

I Filed a CERCLA Petition to Put the South Bay (Boston, MA) on the National Priorities List

2/13/2026

0 Comments

 
Read the full petition here: Petition to put South Bay on the NPL (Feb. 13 2026).

For those of you following my work, this is going to be a surprise. I've been dealing with a second environmental disaster — this one in Boston — while simultaneously litigating against Apple and navigating bankruptcy. I didn't talk about it publicly because I needed to be sure of what I was looking at before I said it out loud, but I'm sure now & it's a real mess.

Today I filed a Petition for Preliminary Assessment under CERCLA § 105(d) and a Sixty-Day Notice for a Citizen Suit under the Clean Water Act and CERCLA, nominating the South Bay in Boston for the National Priorities List. There have never been any NPL sites in the City of Boston. The petition argues there should have been one a long time ago.

Most people who visit Boston don't realize that at least a third of the city shouldn't exist. The Shawmut Peninsula (the original landmass) was a tiny, hilly island barely connected to the mainland by a narrow tidal isthmus called "the Neck." Everything around it was ocean, tidal flats, salt marshes, and bays. The South Bay was one of the largest of these. It was a working harbor, a port of international importance, and the economic heart of early colonial Boston. Tidal streams, including the Roxbury Creek and Dorchester Brook, fed into it. The ocean ebbed and flowed, with high tides twice a day.

Over approximately two hundred years, Boston filled this bay. They filled it with garbage, sewage, construction debris, coal ash, rubble from the Great Fire of 1872, cinders, street sweepings, and dredged harbor mud. The wharves were built on timber cribbing and wood pile foundations; the spaces between were stuffed with whatever was available. Sugar refineries, iron foundries, and slave-trade shipping operations filled the shoreline for their own purposes. The South Boston Iron Works, the largest foundry in the country by mid-century, repeatedly filled its land from the 1830s through 1860. The Boston Wharf Company (whose directors were also shareholders in the Bay State Sugar Refinery and notorious slave owners) filled the areas around Fort Point Channel. The Gillette razor company moved in around 1905 and was still filling (with straight-up bricks) into the 1960s. The City and Commonwealth were involved in or approved nearly all of it.


​....

Read More
0 Comments

    Author

    Updates from Ashley Gjovik about her whistleblower battle against Apple Inc.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    February 2026
    January 2026
    December 2025
    November 2025
    October 2025
    September 2025
    August 2025
    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    June 2023
    January 2023
    July 2022
    January 2022
    September 2021
    August 2021

    Categories

    All
    Appeals
    Apple Inc
    Boston
    CERCLA
    Civil Lawsuit
    Clean Air Act
    Complaint
    CWA
    Decision
    Discovery
    EPCRA
    Inspection Report
    Labor
    NDAs
    NLRB
    Notice Of Hearing
    Protest
    Publication
    RCRA
    Sanctions
    Santa Clara
    Semiconductor Fab
    Sunnyvale
    Superfund Sites
    Surveillance
    Triple Site
    TSCA
    U.S. Courts
    US Dept. Of Labor
    US EPA
    Video
    Whistleblower

 

 

 

 

 

Original Content Copyright © Ashley M. Gjovik

[Contact]    [Consulting]   [Privacy Policy]   [Disclaimer]
  • Home
  • Contact
  • Updates (RSS)
  • Interviews & Press
  • Support
  • Ashley's Apple Saga
    • Gjovik v Apple (Legal)
    • About Ashley's Apple Saga
    • Termination Transcript
    • Justice at Apple
  • Saratoga Creek System
    • Clean Water Act Sixty Day Notice
    • Santa Clara Baylands
    • North Central Santa Clara Geology
    • Saratoga Creek & Bayside History
    • The Santa Clara Greenbelt
  • 3250 Scott Blvd (Chip Fab)
  • Triple Site
    • Triple Site (Superfund)
    • HAZWOPER Reading Room
  • South Bay/Boston Marsh
    • History of South Bay, South End, & Fort Point (19th-21st Century)
    • Boston History (Pre-19th Century)
    • The Hidden Hydrology of Boston & South End
    • South Bay Geotechnical Review
    • Geology of Boston
    • The Cesspool & Sewage Pollution
    • Sewer infrastructure and CSO Systems
    • South Bay Incinerator & Dump Site
    • Biological & Medical Hazards
    • Industrial History & Landfilling
    • Biota & Ecosystem
    • Declarations & Enforcement Actions
  • Journal of Ecology & Evolution