Marine Geophysical Exploration

Tag: Philip Landau (Page 1 of 10)

Protest Norway’s PGS ASA Scheme to Implement Financing

Commentary Addressing PGS ASA 26 November 2020 Public Announcement

Marine Seismic Survey Front Page Provides a Listing of Protected Publications with Links

Matters related to corporate responsibility can greatly impact the ability of a company to create profitability and shareholder value over the long term, and investors are therefore increasingly attaching importance to these matters when making investment decisions. Oslo Børs has produced this guidance on the reporting of corporate responsibility in order to help increase transparency and improve reporting. The guidance is intended to be a practical tool that companies can adapt to the nature of their business and their size.

Bente A. Landsnes, President & CEO, Oslo Børs

Open Letter to Lucid Issuer Services Limited, 27 November 2020

ATTN: Victor Parzyjagla,

Steven D. Kalavity (SDK) is a USA citizen who had worked with different affiliates Norwegian company PGS ASA (formerly Petroleum Geo-Services ASA) [PGS] globally since 2000. In December 2013, SDK was illegally terminated from employment with the PGS ASA UK subsidiary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, 4 The Heights, Weybridge, Surrey, KT13 0NY, England [PGSUK]. PGSUK had sponsored SDKs Tier 2 visa which allowed him to legally work in the UK and also allow his family dependent members to also live in England legally. In September 2018, directors of PGSUK sponsored illegal criminal and civil litigation in Thailand against SDK. SDK has been publishing online legally protected content revealing PGS ASA corruption and fiduciary neglect since 3 July 2015. PGSUK is an English company governed by the laws of England. As such, whistleblowing is protected through the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA). However, Norwegian law also provides protections for whistleblowing through their Working Environment Act 2005 (WEA).

Any PGS ASA refinancing scheme must demand PGS ASA full disclosure regarding allegations of PGS ASA board of directors (BoD) corruption and fraud which imperils the future financial standing and success of the company. Non-transparency is a significant financial risk that must be accounted for by lenders. PGS ASA has illegally breached both PIDA and WEA whistleblower protection provisions and fabricated charges of criminal defamation in Thailand, where SDK was living with his family at the time. Silencing the truth which SDK publishes is required so that PGS ASA is able to continue defrauding investors through disinformation regarding PGS ASA real business practices. The main objective of the illegal litigation was to hide the truth from the public and continue their deceit of investors. The litigation in Thailand misrepresenting legally protected public disclosure under Norway and UK law as criminal defamation under the laws Thailand was wholly unnecessary and illegal.

The intention by PGS has been the continued deceit of their investors and stakeholders. PGS’ corrupt business practices, as highlighted by their extortion by illegal retaliatory sponsored litigation in Thailand, has diminished PGS value and reputation, as well as seriously damaged the upstream oil and gas exploration industry fair market. PGS ASA has already acknowledged that the reputation and value of PGS has been damaged to a criminal level punishable by 2-5 years in Thailand prison. So, the cited damage is significant. However, what remains left in doubt is who should be accountable for this significant damage to PGS ASA value and reputation? It is the duty and responsibility of the organizations BoD and executive management to make decisions that enhance company and shareholder value. To maintain a competitive advantage, businesses have a vested interest in keeping working projects, innovative ideas, or exciting new products secret lest they fall into the hands of a competitor. For this reason, employers require their employees to uphold Confidentiality Agreements or Clauses as part of their contract of employment that prohibit current or former employees from disparaging the company and disclosing their negative experience, even if it’s truthful. The PGSUK employment contract with SDK contained such Confidentiality provisions.

In Norway, it is illegal for contractual Confidentiality Agreements or Clauses to be used to silence whistleblowing. In England, such contractual provisions are not enforceable under English law. In other words, Confidentiality Agreements or Clauses cannot be legally used to protect corrupt actors from being exposed. Organization corruption always negatively impacts the company financial standing and future viability. Lenders must know the veracity of any alleged breach in the fiduciary duties of the BoD and executive management when considering proposed financial schemes that impact lending decisions. PGS has misused Confidentiality Agreements or Clauses to silence whistleblowing and deceive stakeholders. Principal PGS shareholders and investors have been complicit in the deception through not taking definitive actions predicated on the revelations made through numerous online publications. PGS cited the numerous online publications to be (criminally) defamatory, not just disparaging. PGS has never invoked contractual Confidentiality clauses governed by English law to stop the publication of “defamatory” content even when former employee’s who violate such terms and conditions risk facing hundreds of thousands of UK pounds in fines.

It should not be surprising that principal investors are aligned to the proposed financing scheme when they have ignored the numerous publicly disclosed online allegations of PGS mismanagement and corruption. PGS has instead employed subversive methods to deceive stakeholders and silence whistleblowing allegations. First of all, PGS legal compliance headed by now PGS CEO and President Rune Olav Pedersen, did not respond to numerous reports made online and through e-mail. Had the PGS Compliance Hotline abided by the contractual Confidentiality clauses responsibly and responded to several online publications and e-mails, there would have been no need for the subsequent “defamatory” online publications to follow. PGS never commented nor responded to several articles citing PGS corrupt practices published on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform from 3 July 2015 through 20 August 2016. Instead, outside actors complained to LinkedIn™ content moderators. The defamatory complaints against SDK misrepresented published legal and contractually protected public disclosure as simply the misguided rants of a disgruntled former employee. This misrepresentation to the LinkedIn™ global community resulted in SDKs LinkedIn™ account being restricted and all published content being removed.

These actions were in fact a contract breach by PGS. PGS did not act on public disclosure in accordance to Confidentiality clauses. PGS intentionally avoided the English legal system. Litigation revolving around the Confidentiality clauses would have revealed PGS corruption, fraud, forged documentation, bribery, embezzlement, and all sorts of malpractice and mismanagement. SDK had been temporarily restricted on LinkedIn™ prior to the final and permanent restriction in August 2016. To avert LinkedIn™ content control, SDK created where LinkedIn™ content was republished and along with new content. The main result of PGS illegal litigation against SDK in Thailand was the theft of and the destruction of evidence consisting of published content and archives which would have been cited had PGS and SDK proceeded through trial in Thailand. The directors of a an English company registered with Companies House and governed by the laws of England sponsored a Thai legal firm to pursue criminal defamation charges under Thai law against a whistleblower when both remained bound by the terms and conditions of contractual Confidentiality clauses. There is no criminal defamation under English law. Beyond this, how can there not be a breach in the contractual Confidentiality clauses governed by English law and also be criminal defamation in Thailand?

PGS compelled SDK to sign yet another Confidentiality Agreement governed by the laws of Thailand and the laws of the USA state of Texas(?) to supersede the Confidentiality clauses of the original employment contract governed by the laws of England. SDK does not believe that the Thailand Agreement signed 9 November 2018 is a legal instrument for a number of reasons. Again, PGS is misusing Confidentiality clauses to illegally silence protected public disclosure of PGS corruption and malfeasance. The Thai Agreement was obviously signed under duress and the threat of criminal prosecution in Thailand with a potential 2-5 year prison term if found guilty for each claim by the former PGSUK secretary AND PGSUK directors. It should be noted that litigation in Thailand was first threatened by the acting PGSUK secretary as an individual divorced from PGS. SDK believes this was misrepresentation. An acting secretary cannot legally divorce himself from legal actions regarding the company which he represents. Litigation forwarded by a former PGSUK secretary and then English company, PGSUK, governed by the laws of England, including that legal proceedings be conducted in the English language, was delivered to USA citizen SDK in the Thai language to be defended in the Thai criminal and civil legal system?

At this point in time, several articles had been published from 3 July 2015 through October 2018 that never received comment by PGS. This included several Open Letters requesting legal clarifications for many of the fore-mentioned concerns. The claim put together by PGS does not include several published articles, nor reference any of the numerous attempts to communicate with PGS Compliance Hotline. Further, PGS has refused to present any claims in the English language. SDK believes that the litigation forwarded by PGS in Thailand is illegal extortion (UK blackmail). SDK never abided by the terms and conditions of the Thai Agreement. In fact, during the 10-day agreement certification period following the signing of the Thai Agreement, SDK breached the agreement through exposing the illegal litigation to PGS customer JOGMEC. PGS was in the process of negotiating the sale of a seismic vessel to Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC). PGS again illegally retaliated against SDK for blowing the whistle, which is protected through both Norway’s WEA and UKs PIDA! PGS threatened new criminal and civil prosecution in Thailand for SDKs “breach” of the illegal Thai Agreement. A new criminal proceeding was scheduled for January 2019. However, PGS and the former secretary decided to not forward the new criminal proceedings. had been taken offline following the “breach” of the Thai Agreement. Around mid-December 2018, SDK discovered that had been stolen and all evidence necessary for defending against the new charges was destroyed. PGS did not move forward with the criminal and civil trials. SDK did incur substantial financial loss through the litigation forwarded by PGSUK and the former secretary. The Thai litigation also traumatized SDK Thai relatives to the point that one went to the hospital! SDK began to republished content and write new content in February 2019 on While the intention was to republish all material as it appeared on, some content was lost through the domain theft and edits or addendums to content may differ from offline archives. The Thai legal firm and PGS UK Head of Legal continued to cite SDK breaches in the Thai Agreement. In July 2019, SDK moved back to the USA. PGS continued delivering “Legal Notices” to SDK Thai relatives in his absence. In February 2020, PGS demanded that SDK return to Thailand to answer charges. As late as April 2020, PGS cited that SDK was in breach of the Thai Agreements.

PGS has never abided by their legal agreements with SDK governed by the laws of England. Because the proposed financial scheme Lock-Up Agreement for PGS must be sanctioned by an English Court, it is essential that it is established that PGS has been abiding by English law and that they invoke Confidentiality clauses terms and conditions governed by the laws of England. Several reports have been submitted to UK ActionFraud (police) that must be investigated thoroughly prior to any substantive agreement. Additional reports have been submitted to the UK Information Commissioner’s Office citing PGS Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) and General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR) violations involving the processing of forged and defamatory SDK personal data that was used to support an illegal employment termination settlement contract. Copious amount of material has been sent to ICO caseworkers to support SDK allegations of PGS fraudulent and illegal actions against a whistleblower. This has included the illegal use of USA and Thai passport data, illegal reporting to UK, USA, Norway, and Thai government immigration agencies and processing of false / forged instruments as personal data.

PGS initiated criminal defamation claims using the Thai legal system even though whistleblower SDK and PGS are bound by agreements containing Confidentiality terms and conditions governed by the laws of England. Lenders must have confidence that PGS is in compliance with the laws of England proceeding any Lock-Up Agreement requiring the approval of an English Court. SDK never defamed PGS! SDK exposed PGS corruption to the benefit of lenders and shareholders mostly, but to all industry stakeholders generally. The English Court must demand answers and adjudication within the English legal system regarding PGS’ misuse of Confidentiality clause terms and conditions in place to protect company reputation and value, but being employed as an instrument to deceive lenders and investors. I invite the English Court to conduct a simple Google™ image search on pgs asa and ask why no legal action has been taken against SDK using the English legal system? SDK implores the English Court to conduct appropriate due diligence and establish the integrity of PGS business practices prior to any approval of a Lock-Up Agreement.


Steven D. Kalavity, PGS ASA Whistleblower

Demand that the PGS ASA Board of Directors and Executive Management Team be Investigated

Neeta Aulak: Watson Farley & Williams LLP Director of Corruption and Non-Compliance (24 July 2020)

Carl Richards, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited Secretary, is Accused of Initiating Illegal Criminal Defamation Prosecutions under Thailand Law for a Company Governed by the Laws of England to Retaliate Against his USA and Thai Citizen Crime Victims

The Crimes of Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen (4-Sep-2016)
John Francas, PGS UK Head of Legal, Ignorance and the Fraud of Omission (4 October 2019)


Open Letter to Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc.

15375 Memorial Drive, Houston, TX 77079 is dedicated to preserving the integrity of the Geophysicist / Geoscientist profession consistent with the Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) Code of Ethics. If you are aware or suspect unethical behavior that raises concern, or can cause harm to employees, the company, and or its members, report it online at:, Username: seg, Password: whistle.

SEG Membership implies that professional members abide by the Code of Ethics!

What #PhilipLandau, #London #EmploymentLaw Solicitor taught me about Settlement Contracts (30 April 2017)
Petroleum Geo-Services ASA and the UN Global CON – pact (15-Jul-2018)
PINTEREST Landau Law – London, Employment Law
Submitting Grievances and Whistleblowing as a Foreign Work (8 March 2019)
Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. Houston TX PGS Corrupt
CONTROL YOUR EMOTIONS – Best Motivational Speech ( Jim Rohn ,TD Jakes , Les Brown )

ATTN: Jon Erik Reinhardsen, Chairman; Gottfred Langseth, Director; Christin Steen-Nilsen, Director; Kevin M. Hart, Secretary; Corina Maria Ragazzo, Secretary; Robert Johnson, Treasurer

Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc.:

Articles about Norway’s Equinor (StatOil) Corrupt Chairman of the Board, Jon Erik Reinhardsen

My name is Steven Kalavity (SDK).  SDK is a USA citizen who worked with several of Norwegian company Petroleum Geo-Services ASA (now PGS ASA, “PGS”) subsidiaries from 2000 – 2013.  SDKs first assignment with PGS was in Houston, Texas (PGSUS).  When SDK worked globally for PGS, Houston, Texas, USA, remained SDKs home of record for USA federal purposes, such as voting.  However, SDK spent very little actual time in Texas over the years working globally for PGS.  SDKs home of record for PGS while working on vessels and remote data processing centers was Thailand.  SDKs final assignment was with PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, 4 The Heights, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY (PGSUK) as part of the Contract Sales – Africa group from September 2010 to December 2013.  SDK was sponsored on a Tier 2 work visa by PGSUK which allowed him to work and live in England with his family.  At the time of SDKs signing a termination settlement contract agreement (SCA) in December 2013, the directors of both PGSUK and PGSUS were Jon Erik Reinhardsen, Gottfred Langseth and Christin Steen-Nilsen.  SDKs SCA included provisions for relocation expenses to Houston, Texas.  SDK was the only one of the Thai-USA family who had actually lived in Houston.  SDKs family departed England 24 December 2013.  According to records, this was one day following PGS’ board of directors had signed their commitment for PGS to abide by the Principles of the UN Global Compact.  As CEO and President of PGS, Reinhardsen highlighted this commitment within a letter to PGS stakeholders.

Second Open Letter to PGS Exploration UK Limited Directors Rune Olav Pedersen, Gottfred Langseth, Christin Steen-Nilsen, Carl Richards and UK Serious Fraud Office (16-October-2018)

PGS has refused to confirm the employer / agency of employee Gareth Jones, especially from the period of between 1 June – 31 December 2014.  This withholding of information is an obstruction of justice.  In October 2014, SDK submitted a subject access request (SAR) to PGS / PGSUK citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) so as to receive copies of the personal data that PGS / PGSUK was processing relevant to SDK.  UK (England) Data Controllers, such as employers, are legally obligated to abide by DPA Principles.  As a USA citizen who worked under contract in England governed by the laws of England, DPA compliance formed part of the employment contract.

Subject data must not be transferred to other countries outside the European Enterprise Area (EEA) without adequate protection

uk data protection act 1998 (DPA), eighth Principle

It is implied that the legal and contractual DPA Principles 1-7 are being adhered to by the data controller.  For the record, the USA does not form part of the EEA.  One of the considerations for subject data transfer outside the USA is whether the data subject has consented to such a transfer of their personal data.  What SDK discovered once receiving copies of personal data being processed by PGS / PGSUK was inaccurate and defamatory personal data.  Obviously, SDK would not consent to this and it is otherwise illegal. Most notably, contents of SDKs professional personnel file contained several documents not signed by nor verified by the data subject.  Most were signed or endorsed solely by the PGS UK HR Manager, David Nicholson.  SDK did not work for Nicholson nor HR and Nicholson possesses no direct knowledge of SDKs work, i.e., Nicholson did not / does not possess any qualified privilege with respect to his authored content. PGS HR Manager Nicholson (retired in shame) solely signed/endorsed SDK personnel file content which is both fraudulent and defamatory. 

The legal standard for documents populating one’s personnel file throughout SDKs entire working life, up to my experience with PGS, had always been a required employee verification (not necessarily agreement) of all documents being processed within their personnel file.  In other words, documents held within personnel files require the signature of the data subject.  However, in SDKs case, every document of consequence held within SDKs personnel file bore no subject (SDK) signature! Regardless of whether or not there was a PGS violation of DPA Principle 8, tenured HR staff should have easily recognized that SDK personnel file data did not comply with the most basic HR legal standards.  The documents being processed are illegal.  There is no way to verify the accuracy of SDKs personal data without a counter-signature.  E-mail records contradict the content of the forged and defamatory documents endorsed by Nicholson.  Also, SDKs employment was terminated by the SCA.  One of the provisions of signing the SCA was a letter by my former employer, PGS, for reference in SDKs search for new employment.  The letter was predicated on the contents of SDKs professional personnel file, which contains a copy of the SCA.  So, regardless of any violation of DPA Principle 8, the contents of SDKs personnel file were implicitly shared with PGSUS for the explicit purpose of being referenced for SDKs employment search in the US / Houston job market.  The PGS SDK personnel file document contents are inaccurate and defamatory.  The contents violate most every DPA principle and also seem to constitute the illegal blacklisting under Texas statute. 

Why I Believe that Duensing – Kippen’s Delivered “Legal Notices” on Behalf of PGS ASA are Crimes (25 Mar 2020)

Nicholson, along with SDKs immediate supervisor, Edward von Abendorff, PGS VP Contract Sales – Africa, and his supervisor, Simon Cather, PGS Marine Contract Africa Regional President had all been accused of gross misconduct, breaches of SDKs employment contract, bullying / harassment, discrimination, misuse of the performance management system and defamation, etc., within a 20 September 2013 SDK submitted workplace grievance (“Grievance”).  The Grievance is referenced within the SCA being processed within SDKs personnel file.  However, the copy of the personnel file which was provided to SDK following the 2014 SAR did not include a copy of the Grievance.  The contents of the Grievance met the standard of qualified protected disclosure, or whistleblowing, as defined by both the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) and the Norwegian Working Environment Act 2005/2017 (WEA).  This is important because SDK was employed by contract governed by the laws of England.  However, the Grievance was delivered to agents of Norway’s PGS which is governed by the laws of Norway.  The only document not signed and/or endorsed by Nicholson being processed within SDKs PGS personnel file is a 25 October 2013 memo (Memo) signed by Per Arild Reksnes, PGS Marine Contract EVP and Terje Bjølseth, PGS SVP Global Human Resources, who are not agents of PGSUK.  Both Cather and Nicholson are “exonerated” by Reksnes and Bjølseth through this Memo for their multiple abuses of power, misconduct and contract violations that were cited within the Grievance.    

Following the receipt of the copies of SDK personal data provided through the SAR late 2014 (2014 SAR), SDK complained vigorously to PGS, of course, but also to the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and Norwegian Data Protection Authority who oversee data controller personal data processing compliance.  On 22 December 2014, a year after having signed the SCA, PGSUK wrote a threatening letter to SDK for disputing the obviously inaccurate and defamatory forged SDK personal data PGS processed and apparently shared outside the EEA, according to a 30 October 2013 email to SDK from Bjølseth.  The wire and mail transfer of fraudulent (forged) personal data would constitute the US Federal crimes of mail and wire fraud.  As stated before, it serves the data subject to have compliant and accurate personal data sent outside the EEA to the USA to facilitate searching for employment in the USA.  However, processing defamatory forged documents in retaliation for blowing the whistle is patently illegal.  Also, Nicholson was the principal processor of SDK personal data along with HR employee, Laura Haswell, in spite of the fact that Nicholson had orchestrated and was at the center of the events which brought about and constituted the content of the Grievance.  (The 2014 SAR content also revealed communications between Haswell and Jones regarding SDKs impending move to the USA, indicating a global criminal conspiracy by PGS to defraud.) Within the 22 December 2014 letter (Extortion Letter) sent on behalf of PGSUK [Reinhardsen, Langseth, and Steen-Nilsen] and endorsed/signed by Nicholson, who had been accused of criminal misconduct within the Grievance, PGSUK agreed to alter SDK personal data being processed through the inclusion of SDKs 5 December 2014 complaint e-mail even though the Extortion Letter/email stated otherwise.

Termination of employment by a settlement contract requires that the employee receive counsel by an employment law solicitor.  PGS breached SDKs original employment contract (OEC) by proffering a termination settlement contract without proceeding through all of the steps of the legal and contractually mandated grievance procedure.  Following SDKs being offered a termination settlement contract, SDK immediately contacted UK (English) employment law solicitor, Philip Landau, who was with Landau Zeffert and Weir Solicitors (LZW) at the time.  Landau was provided with a summary of the grievance points and the fact that the SCA was proffered before the grievance procedures outlined within the PGS UK Personnel Handbook had been followed and completed as prescribed by the OEC. Landau should have easily recognized the Grievance as protected disclosure and queried about the terms and conditions of the OEC to determine whether the OEC had been breached. Nevertheless, on 1 November 2013 the negotiations – confidence fraud – commenced for the final terms and conditions of the SCA.  PGS engaged legal firm Watson Farley and Williams (WFW) employment solicitor, Rhodri Thomas, to negotiate the final terms and conditions of the SCA.  WFW Thomas similarly ignored UK law and PGS policy and procedure to pressure SDK into an uncontested “termination” through a fraudulent SCA. Thus, SDK has concluded that Landau and his assistant, Holly Rushton, and WFW were bribed into processing the forged documents to support an illegal termination settlement contract which bypassed SDKs legal right to follow the prescribed grievance procedure to protect the criminals.

The Memo is dated for when Landau represented SDK. The Memo references a canceled meeting which Landau also was informed about.  The Memo references a letter by SDK that was never written and in fact does not exist.  A legal grievance process must include a written notification of the outcome to the griever, as well as notification that the griever has a right to appeal the decision.  The Memo was created to represent SDKs acceptance of an unfavorable outcome to the Grievance agreed to with the guidance of legal counsel.   The (forged) Memo does not even reference the actual Grievance nor inform SDK of his legal and contractual right to appeal the Grievance decision.  SDKs Grievance recipient and witness, John Barnard, was not included as a recipient of the Memo. Barnard was supposed to ensure the proper proceeding of the legal grievance process. SDK was being terminated through settlement contract by the foregone conclusion that he otherwise would be terminated for performance which was evidenced only by the malicious and unprivileged assessment of an accused criminal, Nicholson (and Cather and von Abendorff). PGS / PGSUK had written to and applied for SDKs Leave to Remain with the UK Border Agency 15 July 2013. On 24 July 2013, Nicholson endorsed a letter (Ambush Letter) written on behalf of PGSUK (Reinhardsen, Langseth, and Steen-Nilsen) citing apprehension about SDKs performance. The Grievance was SDKs response to the Ambush Letter. The Ambush Letter was PGSUK / PGS frantic attempt to obstruct SDK from beginning the grievance process following what SDK believed was an illegal Ambush Meeting hosted by Nicholson, Cather, and von Abendorff. PGS / PGSUK were illegally obstructing SDKs legal and contractual right to blow the whistle.  PGS / PGSUK were also defrauding UK Border Agency and ICO (and NDPA).  LZW Landau/Rushton and WFW Thomas aided and abetted in these frauds.

SDK has known that he was a victim of PGS crimes since receiving the 2014 SAR content.  However, the binding nature of settlement agreements combined with the breadth, money, and number of criminal co-conspirators and their agency (WFW and LZW lawyers) has made just resolution much more difficult.  The OEC contained Confidentiality clauses that prohibit employees from publishing disparaging content about PGS and its stakeholders (which would include WFW).  The SCA also contained mutual Confidentiality clauses that prohibited both SDK and PGS from publishing disparaging content about one another.  Of course, the publication / processing of defamatory forged documents was a breach of the SCA.  However, this could only be established by first establishing that the SCA itself was fraudulent.  It is important to note that not all publication of disparaging content is a breach.  Whistleblowing is protected through PIDA/WEA.  SDK submitted his first report to the UK police (ActionFraud) 24 August 2015.  On 3 July 2015, SDK published An American, the UK Data Protection Act, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Tyranny of “Accurate Data” (3-Jul-2015) on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform.  On 6 September 2015, SDK published, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign (6-Sep-2015)In spite of the threats made within the Extortion Letter months before, PGS took no action.  PGS’ responsibility to shareholders was to investigate the whistleblowing claims and then cite a breach in the SCA terms and conditions to stop future publications and safeguard the reputation and value of PGS.  PGS remained silent.  SDK contacted PGS Compliance Hotline composed of PGS General Counsel, Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke, and Bjølseth (PGS Compliance).  PGS Compliance were provided with articles and emails proving that the SCA was illegal, as was SDKs termination from employment for blowing the whistle.  PGS Compliance never responded.  This was a violation of their fiduciary duty and a furtherance of the damage and fraud to whistleblower SDK and continuation of the intentional deception to the upstream oil and gas industry investors.

The Crimes of Philip Landau #London #EmploymentLaw #Solicitor and Petroleum Geo-Services #PGS #CEO #Pedersen (30 December 2017)

In 2016, SDK submitted another SAR to PGS.  SDK also submitted SARs to WFW and LZW.  (LZW had become Landau Law in early 2014. SDK supposes that this was done to help launder the money received in bribes.)  Landau / Rushton never reached out to SDK to warn about or admonish his online publications.  PGS and WFW also provided no additional data nor comment regarding SDK online publications. SDK regarded as his publications as legally protected public disclosure.  In August 2016 SDK was further defrauded and defamed by PGS.  SDK had been publishing his legally protected public disclosure within the PGS LinkedIn™ comment space.  PGS again were in breach of the Confidentiality terms and conditions by not investigating whistleblowing claims nor citing a contract breach.  Instead, PGS irresponsibly deleted the protected public disclosure and continued their defamation and defrauding of a whistleblower and the industry.  SDK was restricted and further defamed on LinkedIn™ through PGS not abiding by the contractual Confidentiality terms.  PGS Compliance on two separate occasions during 2016 breached the Confidentiality terms of the SCA.  PGS Compliance stated that they had investigated and found no issues.  PGS Compliance found no issues with unsigned and unverified documents within a whistleblowers professional personnel file?  It was a cover-up which SDK also wrote about prior to being restricted on LinkedIn™, The Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Ambush Meeting and the Definition of Fraud (24-May-2016)What has been most damaging through all of this ordeal is to have witnessed the abject moral weakness and lack of principles of former co-workers who have made the constructive decision to aid and abet evil criminals above victims of their crimes.  PGS has expended a lot of resources to deceive the industry.  Much of this has been through salary bribes and promotions paid to complicit employees who breach the PGS Code of Conduct and Core Values to damage an innocent victim of crimes and whistleblower along with his family who were also under PGS’ contractual duty of care.

Following SDKs defamatory restriction from LinkedIn™, SDK established to publish his protected disclosure without the constraints of uninformed social media gatekeepers intimidated by corrupt corporate agents.  SDK used Twitter™ to continue informing @PGSNews about new publications related to PGS non-compliance.  No agent of PGS, WFW, or LZW had ever contacted SDK with regard to the several online publications which exposed PGS non-compliance.  In 2018, SDK was living in Thailand.  For the first time ever, in April 2018, someone purporting to be affiliated with PGS had something to say about SDKs online publications.  Carl Richards was the PGS UK Head of Legal and PGSUK company secretary from 13 September 2013.  In other words, Richards was PGSUK secretary at the time the Grievance was delivered.  According to 2014 SAR contents, Richards and his associate lawyer, Ben Kelly, had reviewed and approved the final terms and conditions of the SCA (which references the Grievance, unlike the Memo).  By 2018, SDK had established that he was a victim of a criminal conspiracy and also began to understand the corporate hierarchy and their accountability.  SDK was producing image files which pictured the accused with links to the articles and evidence broadcast through Twitter™.  Richards never did verify his identity in fact.  Richards seemed especially concerned with the publication, Carl Richards, Arbitrary and Capricious Company Secretary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (24 Feb 2018) p112-118and threatened to pursue criminal litigation against SDK as an individual separate from PGS?

In May 2018, lawyer Tippaya Moonmanee with Thailand law firm Duensing – Kippen sent a legal notice on behalf of Richards threatening criminal prosecution for defamation under the laws of Thailand.  The notice further stated that she/Duensing – Kippen did not represent PGS, but only Carl Richards the individual (divorced from his fiduciary responsibilities of PGSUK secretary?).  SDK believed that the notice was extortion and published this belief. SDK also informed Duensing – Kippen that SDK and PGS were currently bound by contractual confidentiality terms and conditions governed by the laws of England and that litigation in Thailand was unnecessary if the SCA is a valid and legal instrument.  (SDK had concluded that the SCA could not be a legal instrument since it was supported by defamatory forged documents.)  SDK did not give too much thought to the correspondence at the time.  But, how did Duensing – Kippen receive SDKs post address in Thailand?  SDK had provided WFW and PGS with passport and post address information for the 2016 SARs.  SDK did comply with the demands, to a degree, at first, but did not receive reasonable verification or details to believe the claim was legitimate.  Richards resigned from PGS 25 May 2013, according to the PGSUK company information published on Companies House website.  In June, SDK again submitted another SAR.  This time SDK cited the new General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR) which had replaced DPA.

Carl Richards’, Secretary, PGS Exploration UK Limited, Silence Implies Agreement and the Abrogation of Fiduciary Duty (20 April 2018) p108-109

No additional data was provided from the 2018 SAR.  However, within the response from PGSUK in-house solicitor, John Francas, PGS again threatened litigation for breaches in the SCA?  In September 2018, SDK left Thailand and returned to the USA.  Duensing – Kippen delivered two criminal complaints to SDKs Thai residence on the date SDK departed Thailand.  Duensing – Kippen and PGS had used SDKs passport data to track his travels.  SDK did not receive the complaints in electronic format.  Only firm copies were delivered by post.  SDK had to shorten his visit to the USA and return to Thailand to address the PGS sponsored criminal complaints.  Even though Duensing – Kippen had explicitly informed SDK that they did not represent PGS, upon arriving to back to Thailand, Duensing – Kippen had delivered two criminal complaints.  One was on behalf of Richards, who still had never confirmed his identity in fact.  The other claim was on behalf of PGSUK directors Pedersen, Langseth and Steen-Nilsen.  Duensing – Kippen had lied to SDK in stating that they did not represent PGS.  The “legal claims” of criminal defamation under Thai law included only a small portion of the publications posted since 2015.  Content had been translated from its original publication in English into Thai.  SDK sent several inquiry emails to PGSUK directors and legal, including Francas, PGS General Counsel Lars Mysen, and PGS Data Protection Officer, Daphne Bjerke, and PGS UK HR Manager Gareth Jones.  No one replied to these emails even with the ongoing litigation in Thailand.  SDK had to hire Thai lawyers and travel to Bangkok, Thailand Criminal Court to address the claims.  This costs thousands of US dollars since there were two separate criminal claims instead of just one. 

Letter to Daphne Bjerke, Petroleum Geo-Services ASA (PGS) Data Protection Officer and ICO Caseworker (2-Sep-2018)

The claims delivered by Duensing – Kippen on behalf of PGS, WFW, and LZW traumatized SDKs Thai in-laws.  SDKs mother in-law went to the hospital and became gravely ill.  SDKs family in the US were also traumatized – and still are, along with my wife and children because of PGS’ harassment and illegal actions against their victim of crimes!  The delivered claims also were a material breach of the SCA which prohibited the publication of disparaging content, such as an illegal false criminal complaint to silence a whistleblower.  On 11 November 2018, SDK signed two Thai compromise agreements to avoid criminal trial in Thailand.  For the record, Duensing – Kippen have no idea what is or is not defamation.  Neither does Francas.  The entire point of SDKs publications is to expose PGS processing illegal forged and unverifiable documents.  Defamation is the publication or disclosure of false and harmful information about another party.  One cannot ascertain what is true or false through documents that have no counter-signature or supporting data.  Further, the threshold for disparagement is much less than proving defamation.  How can there be criminal defamation in Thailand but not a breach in the SCA?  There cannot be.  The litigation in Thailand was get evidence of crimes de-published.  Within 10-days of the Thai compromise agreements, SDK was told that he “breached” the Thai agreements through reporting the current predicament and ongoing litigation to JOGMEC while PGS was negotiating the sale of a vessel to JOGMEC.  SDK again was exercising his legal right under law and contract to publicly disclose PGS mischief, but was silenced to PGS could once again silence the truth.

PGS and Richards had Duensing – Kippen (illegally) file two more criminal complaints in retaliation for SDKs whistleblowing to JOGMEC.  The new trials were set for January 2019.  SDK had taken offline as discussions around the litigation and compromise agreements were ongoing.  SDK does not believe that the Thai agreements are legally enforceable for several published reasons.  The main issues are that SDKs contracts with PGSUK are governed by English law with no limit in time.  This includes data protection provisions by GDPR and whistleblower protection through PIDA.  The Thai compromise agreements were unnecessary if the OEC had not been breached by PGS and the SCA were a legal instrument.  Between 11 November 2018 and January 2019, likely in December 2018, was stolen and SDK lost access to his website.  This theft and destruction of evidence was intended to silence legal and protected disclosure about PGS corruption.  However, SDK has been certain since 2014 SAR that PGS processes inaccurate defamatory data.  Nicholson and Francas both threatened litigation due to breaches in the SCA when they both knew the SCA was not an enforceable legal instrument supported by forged documents.  The Thai Compromise agreements also had resolution venues in Harris County, Texas federal or state courts.  SDK questioned this.  Thai defamation laws are notoriously severe. These laws do not parallel Texas law or USA Federal law.  The USA is comprised of fifty independent states with separate laws which differ from federal statute.  Neither the USA nor Texas can or would enforce Thai criminal laws.

Neeta Aulak: Watson Farley & Williams LLP Director of Corruption and Non-Compliance (24 July 2020)

On 3 July 2019, Francas contacted by email SDK regarding breaches in the Thai agreement between PGSUK and SDK. content was republished on  Duensing – Kippen has demanded articles de-published.  Based on what?  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law have not presented evidence that the content on actually is the same as and is covered by the litigation because they stole and all content was lost!  Richards has remained silent since slithering out of England (to Brisbane, Australia, SDK believes).  SDK has no idea where Richards is and Richards has made no attempt to change that.  Richards has protested no published content.  No director nor named executive has ever even tried to defend their own reputation.  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law have relied upon illegal threats against SDK and his family from Duensing – Kippen to demand silence.  This is how corrupt and cowardly PGS, WFW, and Landau Law are.  There is no interest in the truth, only the continued deception of a public so PGS, WFW and Landau Law can publish lies about their unethical and illegal business practices.  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law have allowed many disparaging publications that name cohorts.  Reinhardsen has never even tried to defend the reputation and value of PGS, Equinor, and Telenor.  Reinhardsen has allowed employees to have their names published and reputations tarnished.  Leaders do not allow that!  The cowardly and corrupt run away from the truth.

The people most severely damaged by PGS, WFW and Landau Law are the whistleblower and his family. SDK, who publishes the truth is blacklisted?!  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law have caused incalculable damage to the upstream oil and gas industry, as well as the geoscience, HR, and employment law professions. True professionals should admonish such behavior and shun their cowardly and corrupt brethren who destroy lives. They are all disgraceful. As late as May 2020, Duensing – Kippen continued citing SDK breaches in the Thai agreements and harassing SDK and his Thai family.  SDK is in the USA now and the Thai agreements cite the USA federal and state courts of Texas.  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law have been requested to remark on the status of the SCA which they all formed.  Why such an effort to run away from that agreement?  All of the PGS agreements lead us back to Texas where the fake data about PGS was shared.  It takes us back to the questions asked in 2014 and are now posed again to PGS UK HR Manager Gareth Jones.  Explain the Memo and all other documents PGS processes within SDKs PGS personnel file and confirm Jones’ agency/employer from 2013 – 2020?  And answer the base question, is the SCA signed in England 5 December 2013 really a legal contract?  PGS, WFW, and Landau Law silence is obstructing justice and that really is a USA and Texas crime and I have always been a USA citizen.        . 

Petroleum Geo-Services and PGS Exploration UK Limited Conceal Illicit and Non-Compliant Acts through Stonewalling – 2014 (20 October 2018)


Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. Houston, Texas and Jon Erik Reinhardsen’s Abusive Corruption

PINTEREST Corrupt Houston Petroleum Geo-Services PGS HR Gareth Jones

Open Letter to Tina Bru, Norway Minister of Petroleum and Energy (13 June 2020)
Why Elite White-Collar Criminals Are Rarely Punished

For example, on a survey conducted by Family Lives in the U.K., more than 80% of the participants reported that workplace bullying affected their family life. Therefore, the “spillover” effect of workplace bullying on the victims’ personal lives cannot be ignored and constitutes an important consequence of workplace bullying which has been largely neglected by the current literature. Negative job-related feelings such as anger, frustration, despair, and hopelessness can compromise parenting abilities in such a way that the stress resulting from workplace bullying may indirectly affect their children’s psychological well-being and behavior by altering their parenting practices. ~

Effects of workplace bullying on Chinese children’s health
Carl Richards’, Secretary, PGS Exploration UK Limited, Silence Implies Agreement and the Abrogation of Fiduciary Duty (20 April 2018) p108-109
Report Fraud – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Dear Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) Caseworker (1-Jul-2018)


Norway’s PGS ASA Illegal Discrimination to Defraud a USA Citizen Crime Victim and Whistleblower

Norway’s PGS ASA and England’s Legal Firms Watson Farley & Williams and Landau Zeffert & Weir (now Landau Law) Intentionally and Illegally Violated a USA Citizen Foreign Worker Human Rights and Right to Due Process through Exploiting his USA Citizenship Status

Open Letter to Norway’s Telenor Board of Directors Regarding Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke (8 September 2020)
PINTEREST PGS ASA Human Resources Gareth Jones
Was Withholding my Occupational Health Nurse Report from me OK? (22 April 2019)
Boycott Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Capital Markets (25-Jul-2016)
PINTEREST LI PGS East Shetland Slides 300×700
Flying Monkeys (The Narcissist’s Tool for the Smear Campaign)


PINTEREST: PGS ASA, Watson Farley & Williams, Landau Law, EM Law, Equinor, Telenor Corruption Exposed


Who Does The Corporate Narcissist/Psychopath Target
rhodri thomas london employment lawyer EM Law WFW
LI PGS Nigeria LinkedIn Slides 300×700
PGS ASA Human Resources Gareth Jones

Norway’s PGS ASA Illegal Discrimination to Defraud a USA Citizen Crime Victim and Whistleblower

Norway’s PGS ASA and England’s Legal Firms Watson Farley & Williams and Landau Zeffert & Weir (now Landau Law) Intentionally and Illegally Violated a USA Citizen Foreign Worker Human Rights and Right to Due Process through Exploiting his USA Citizenship Status

Open Letter to Norway’s Telenor Board of Directors Regarding Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke (8 September 2020)
PINTEREST PGS ASA Human Resources Gareth Jones
Was Withholding my Occupational Health Nurse Report from me OK? (22 April 2019)
Boycott Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Capital Markets (25-Jul-2016)
PINTEREST LI PGS East Shetland Slides 300×700
Flying Monkeys (The Narcissist’s Tool for the Smear Campaign)


Petroleum Geo-Services #PGS #CEO #Pedersen and the Management of Gang Rape (24 October 2017) – Republish

Republished 26 September 2020 following inclusion within 2018 Thai firm Duensing – Kippen Criminal Defamation Claim and Illegal Whistleblower Retaliation on behalf Norway company PGS ASA

Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign 2 (20-Sep-2015)

Everyone mentioned within these blog posts articles could protect the Company and their own reputations and invoke the terms and conditions of their employment contracts. They would rather keep their jobs and pervert the course of justice and protect corrupt and criminal actions against a USA citizen and his family because they are all complicit in the crimes and gang-rape.

Accused Criminal Rune Olav Pedersen PGS ASA CEO and President Reduces Company Value (8 August 2020)
What are “flying monkeys”? (Glossary of Narcissistic Relationships)
Can PGS Exploration UK Limited Legally Bypass the Terms and Conditions of Previous Contracts Governed Under English Law and Prosecute Claims in Thailand? (3 July 2019)
Wikipedia – UK Companies House 2006
The Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Ambush Meeting and the Definition of Fraud (24-May-2016)
The Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Ambush Meeting and the Definition of Fraud (24-May-2016)
Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Mob Values (14-Jun-2016)
Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Mob Gaslighting (30-Jun-2016)
Why I believe the Criminal Defamation Claim brought forth by Carl Richards, former PGS Exploration UK Limited, England, KT13 0NY, Secretary, is Fraudulent (7 August 2019)

In the absence of truth, power is the only game in town.

Richard John Neuhaus
Landau Law Didn’t Like My Trustpilot Review? (8 June 2019)

Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop fighting.

Napoleon Hill

The image which heads this blog article is the screen capture from a Google™ Image search of PGS #Pedersen.  By any standard, leadership entrusted with advancing the company, as well as its directors and management’s, reputation would not allow being associated with such imagery and accusations.  Therefore, any settlement contract that is intended to end an employment relationship on fair, equitable and reasonable terms, yet allows the employer and its agents open to such public ridicule and criticism would not seem to accomplish its intended objectives.  In fact, the outcome of this settlement has apparently left Norwegian marine seismic service company, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and its UK affiliate, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (PGSUK), agents impotent in constructively resolving such an online tirade.  The PGS/PGSUK legal compliance lawyer, Rune Olav Pedersen (PGS #Pedersen) is responsible for this contract and all of the online postings which it has inspired.  PGS #Pedersen was the principal agent who oversaw the resolution of a grievance addressing workplace bullying/mobbing, harassment, defamation, as well as a litany of other indiscretions, mostly regarding the abuse of position.  Agents were allowed to not abide by UK laws and PGS policy.  The grievance concentrated on acts perpetrated by three (3) PGSUK executives, Simon Cather (PGS #Cather), PGS Marine Contract President – Africa, Edward von Abendorff (PGS #Abendorff), VP Marine Contract Sales – Africa, and David Nicholson (PGS #Nicholson), Human Resource (HR) Manager EAME.

PGS #Pedersen is but one of the alleged PGS/PGSUK criminal and corrupt agents who participated in gang violence intended to protect liars and cheaters and silence my voice.  He along with his co-conspirators have been accused, although none have formally retorted or denied these published accusations.  My publications became necessary when PGS/PGSUK corrupt executives, the board, and compliance team did not do what their legal agency requires.  Their objective has not been legal compliance, but rather covering-up illegal executive behaviors.  PGS/PGSUK agents have either lied or ignored my queries.  The accused were allowed to not investigate – or rather, produce a fabricated investigation which was withheld from me to exonerate themselves.  I believe that the settlement contract proffered to me by PGSUK was not legal.  How is it possible to illegally create and process a false narrative supported by false instruments, misrepresentations, and the withholding and destruction of key data/information to affect a legal agreement?  How is it legal for any agent, my own nor any agent of PGSUK, to accept and process such false instruments, misrepresentations, and the withholding and destruction of key data/information on my behalf?  Common sense would tell most that any such agreement is obviously compromised.  But, that is before the corrupted power of misappropriated PGS resources and money enters into the equation.  When this happens, no legal or compliant outcome is possible.  PGS #Pedersen oversaw the workplace violence and plunder of a whistle blower,

It was PGS #Pedersen who allowed my legal right to file a grievance be obstructed (perverting the course of justice), false documents stating a false narrative to be created and processed (fraud and forgery), and finally withheld a medical recommendation which denied me a medical check-up that may have confirmed that their acts of bullying and harassment were in fact health harming (assault?).  PGS #Pedersen did all this while advancing a settlement contract with the specific intent of allowing PGS executives to escape justice and accountability.  The formation of such an agreement required a lot of shenanigans on the part of PGS agents.  Such a conspiracy and confidence fraud required enlisting a long-term customer and third- party agent, Rhodri Thomas, of legal firm Watson, Farley and Williams, to not carry out normal due diligence and to tell one narrative to the UK Border Agency on the one hand, while telling another juxtaposed narrative to forward an illegal settlement on the other.   My (compromised) legal counsel and agent, Philip Landau and Holly Rushton also allowed false instruments and false data to be advanced and processed.  This simply is not legal.  They were acting as double-agents.  Therefore, based on these facts, as well as my former counsel’s lack of support in rectifying such issues and the many queries raised, I was only left to wonder. How much did PGS agents pay you, Philip Landau?  None of these “professional lawyers” answer my questions or have retained and provided substantive documentation of the negotiation processes they were clandestinely involved in.  More revealing, no lawyer involved has taken any legal action to stop my publications that accuse them of criminal behavior.  Their solution is to have me blocked on social media!  That’s the only option that their legal training has allowed them?  (It is as if the truth might put them in jail!)

Power does not corrupt. Fear corrupts… perhaps the fear of a loss of power.

John Steinbeck

You take my life when you do take the means whereby I live.

William Shakespear, The Merchant of Venice. Act iv. Sc. 1

When people think of rape, they think it as a sexual crime.  However, studies have shown over and over again that rape is a crime of power.  The legal definition of rape is the unlawful sexual intercourse with a person against their will.  The essential elements of the crime of rape are sexual penetration, force, and lack of consent of the other person.  However, a broader dictionary definition of rape is to plunder or violently seize or steal from another.  By this definition, rape is also not only about sex, but even more so about power.  Within this more extensive definition of rape, there is the power dynamic of control and dominance at its core.  The violent sex act becomes the projection and outcome from the abuse of power, whereby something is violently taken-away without the consent of the target.  Beverly McPhail of the University of Houston asserts that rape “occurs due to multiple motives rather than the single motivation. These multiple motivations include, but are not limited to, sexual gratification, revenge, recreation, power/control, and attempts to achieve or perform masculinity.”  Such dominance is demonstrated within heterosexual prison inmate populations.  In prisons, inmates are held within sexually unnatural, repressive, and humiliating environments.  Inmates resort to a system of (masculine) dominance over the weaker inmates that includes sexual rape.

All forms of workplace harassment are about the abuse of power and authority.  Harassment involves intentionally targeting someone associated with a protected group with behavior that is meant to alarm, annoy, torment or terrorize them.  Hierarchical authoritative power is too often demonstrated through corrupt and abusive social and political dominance.  Workplace bullying is demonstrated through such behaviors targeting individuals outside a protected group.  Workplace mobbing is bullying of an individual by a group.  Workplace mobbing is emotional abuse that involves “ganging up” by co-workers, subordinates or superiors, to force someone out of the workplace through rumor, innuendo, intimidation, humiliation, discrediting, and isolation.  Workplace mobbing is also referred to as malicious, nonsexual, nonracial, general harassment.  Perpetrators of workplace violence or rape rely on the same corrupted power structures that support, and too often promote, all forms of workplace violence.  One of the most severe ramifications of abused power is the loss of control and disempowerment which the targets of such abhorrent behaviors experience.  More to the point, the legal protections that are supposed to be afforded to targets of violence are denied through the intentional abuse and perversion of illegally sanctioned authoritative agency power, such as PGS #Pedersen allowing non-compliant and illegal acts be carried-out as a PGS agent for legal compliance.

There is something very understandable about gang violence.  The fact is that people are more likely to do something if they think they can get away with it.  Large numbers provide some statistical likelihood of not getting caught.  However, more importantly, within the workplace, it is the concentration of power and misused agency authority to preserve such corrupted power which makes justice so difficult to realize for targets of abuse.  When internal governance and compliance do not fulfill their legal agency responsibilities, organizations become lawless.  Non-compliant behavior is too often rewarded directly or indirectly through favoring those who look the other way from witnessing bad behavior.  These bystanders and witnesses of bad behavior who remain silent accommodate all corruption.  Too often HR is used as a conduit to pay “bribes” and to reward people for their complicity.  Money can also be laundered and funneled for seemingly benign bonuses or promotions.  Power and money with no third-party oversight is simply a formula for rampant corruption, which is seen too often these days within every industry.  Harassment and bullying are epidemic, yet justice for such abrogation of civility and workplace policy is rarely realized.  Internal governance is a façade that the corrupt create and misuse for self-preservation of power.  Corrupt corporate agents only need to publish core values or responsibility reports.

Authoritative power can decide which scandals are investigated and punished.  Authoritative power can also allow themselves to misuse shareholder value to do it.  When a report was made to UK Action Fraud, PGS/PGSUK voiced no concern about allegations made against executives.  The UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who administer over compliance to the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) have no authentication process and therefore data controllers, such as PGSUK can lie with impunity.  (And they have, thus far.)  Accusing Terje Bjøseth (PGS #Bjolseth), PGS SVP HR and Per Arild Reksnes (PGS #Reksnes), then PGS EVP Marine Contract, and PGS #Cather of forging a memo stating my acceptance of a false narrative does not warrant concern as it is regarded as an “employment issue.”  Even though a person’s employment represents to them a significant amount of money and such fraud is in fact stealing that money, enterprise agent’s access to money and resources to stave off accountability is never in short supply!  PGS #Pedersen and his accomplice within “compliance” are automatically trusted because of their hierarchical authority and the money and resources that it controls.  It has nothing to do with truth or legal compliance.   The likelihood of getting away with a crime is also greatly enhanced with a gang of complicit co-conspirators hiding from the truth.  When corrupt power wants to suppress the truth, it is made easy for them.  The truth is that shareholders and customers actually finance the deceit of misused resources through apathy.  Therefore, the solution for creating workplaces free from health-harming and performance hindering harassment and bullying is for all stakeholders: customers, investors, and competitors, to demand proof of legal compliance and not just hollow statements.  Toxic workplaces cannot be cured through weak and dysfunctional enterprise governance.

I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation.  We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.

Elie Wiesel

When policemen break the law, then there isn’t any law – just a fight for survival. 

Billy Jack character (Billy Jack, 1971)

When the principal enterprise/corporate agents entrusted with the role of legal and policy compliance are themselves entwined in the illegal and corrupt behavior that they are appointed to govern, it is impossible for any outcome to be legal and compliant.  Nowhere is such a workplace culture of harassment and violent mobbing behavior more manifest than within Norwegian marine seismic service company Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS).  My former employer.  And newly appointed PGS CEO, PGS #Pedersen, is an integral proponent of this toxic culture where corrupt acts by board members and executives are financed by their deceived stakeholders and customers.  What the deafening PGS board and executive silence around such allegations makes clear is their very direct involvement at every level in conspiring to carry-out an intentional and organized cover-up.  PGS #Pedersen is placed front and center in both carrying-out and covering-up these nefarious activities.  Because of PGS #Pedersen’s direct involvement, it is also no surprise that he has now become the CEO.  He is in place to shield the depth of PGS corruption.  No credible or honest person would accept this role and not feel compelled to reveal the truth behind such allegations.  In fact, it is the responsibility of key executives and the board of directors to uphold PGS and their own reputations in the eyes of stakeholders.  Ignoring and remaining silent in addressing such allegations is unprofessional, irresponsible, mean, and corrupt.

There is legal non-compliance to be uncovered, if only an honest investigation were carried-out.  Workplace bullying is referred to as the hidden epidemic.  Workplace bullying and harassment top the list of workplace hazards.  Such workplace violence is corruption by almost any reasonable definition.  It is the first tool of corrupt management to rid the workplace of whistle blowers, complainers, and even threatening talent.  Human Resources departments become weaponized to rid employees that threaten corrupt management.  HR departments also become a money laundering operations that pay out rewards to the incompetent and pliant employees who support the corruption.  HR departments are the avenue used to pay off the settlements that protect perpetrators of violence.  Payrolls are used as bribes to coerce others to support the corrupt and perform duties which are against the law or transgress workplace policies and procedures.  Targets of the corrupt, violent, and health-harming effects of workplace bullying seldom find justice.  Much of this is because the concept of corporate governance is too often utter idiocy in practice.  Corrupt organizations simply do not adhere to their own corporate governance protocols.  Isn’t that what corruption is?  Corrupt executives are allowed to maneuver and manipulate processes to protect themselves from any deserved legal or civil liability because corrupt executives allow themselves this non-agency authority to rig the system to their favor through bypassing local laws and company policies.

For over two-years I have been exposing PGS board and executive corruption and hypocrisy to which PGS #Pedersen has played a principal role.  I have tried to use the legitimate company processes for redress.  There have been lies, threats, but mostly silence in response to my phone calls and emails to compliance team members.  When a group of adults are allowed to conspire, coordinate, and engage in workplace mobbing, involving fraud, with the explicit intent of harming and robbing targets of their professional livelihood and reputation, it should resonate with all stakeholders.  Such violent plunder and theft is intended to harm and destroy the targets of abuse while protecting the rapists.  It is the most evil and despicable kind of corruption.  Stakeholders need to understand that corruption impacts the reputation and performance of all professionals and the markets that employ them.  I implore all stakeholders and decent people to demand that PGS #Pedersen, board, and executive chronicle and explain how their decisions and actions followed legal compliance and policy.  PGS #Pedersen was obliged to uphold legal compliance under his agency for PGS.  The fact that he did not carry out his legal duties also implies very clearly that he is corrupt beyond measure.  I am an enemy of the corrupt board and management because I wanted them to follow the rules, policies and the law (of Norway and England).  I am an enemy of the corrupt board and management because they have misused company resources, diminished the profession, and deceived customers.   They have sanctioned all this to harm me and my family.  No agent from PGS/PGSUK has publicly challenged my truthful narrative.  (They dare not expose themselves to rational dialogue.)  I need the help from stakeholders who care about a fair and level playing field offering the best products and services to step up and challenge corruption.  Challenge corruption, deception, and make the industry more safe and fair by not doing business with opaque organizations who cannot demonstrate their core values or responsible behavior.  This is the plea of all victims of crime: Justice.

Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It’s self-defense. It’s patriotism.

Joe Biden

No oppression is so heavy or lasting as that which is inflicted by the perversion and exorbitance of legal authority.

Joseph Addison

Transparency International


Open Letter to EM Law Regarding Employment Lawyer Rhodri Thomas and a Firms Responsibility to the Public Good

Image Content Added 27 November 2020


In discrimination cases, where there has been a breach of the Equality Act 2010 by the employer, the two most important categories are injury to feelings and loss of earnings. Unlike unfair dismissal, there is no limit on the amount of compensation that can be awarded in discrimination cases.

Rhodri Thomas London Employment Lawyer EM Law Watson Farley Williams

What Philip Landau, London Employment Law Solicitor taught me about Settlement Contracts (30 April 2017)
Raise a grievance at work
Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998
Evidence Philip Landau Law, London Employment Solicitor, Conspired and Accepted Bribes from PGS ASA to Defraud his Client SDK (20 May 2020)
Neeta Aulak: Watson Farley & Williams LLP Director of Corruption and Non-Compliance (24 July 2020)
Carl Richards, Arbitrary and Capricious Company Secretary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (24 Feb 2018)
Equality Act 2010

RE:         Crimes and Human Rights Abuses Against a Foreign Worker Whistleblower

  1. Open Letter to Norway’s Telenor Board of Directors Regarding Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke (8 September 2020)
  2. Open Letter to the USA Consulate in Norway and Equinor Board of Directors (27 August 2020)
  3. Open Letter to Tina Bru, Norway Minister of Petroleum and Energy (13 June 2020)
  4. Norway Prime Minister Erna Solberg: Norway has a Corruption Problem (23 May 2020)
  5. Open Letter to PGS Exploration UK Limited Directors Rune Olav Pedersen, Gottfred Langseth, Christin Steen-Nilsen and UK Serious Fraud Office (9 October 2018)
  6. Open Letter to Petroleum Geo-Services ASA Board of Directors (18-Jun-2017)

US Consulate in Norway :

Norway Police – The National Criminal Investigation Service:

Knut Arild Hareide, Norway Minister of Transport:

Erna Solberg, Norway Prime Minister:

Øystein Myrvold, INVESTOR RELATIONS – TELENOR GROUP, Head of Investor Relations,

Kristine Devold, INVESTOR RELATIONS – TELENOR GROUP, Investor Relations Director:

Landau Law Didn’t Like My Trustpilot Review? (8 June 2019)
PGS Exploration (UK) Limited Harasses & Persecutes Whistleblowers in Breach of the Laws of England (18 October 2019)
Articles about Norway’s Equinor (StatOil) Corrupt Chairman of the Board, Jon Erik Reinhardsen (20 September 2019)

EM Law:

What responsibility do employers, such as EM Law, hold to perform proper and ethical due diligence of their employees for matters directly related to their professionalism and ethics?  EM Law employs employment lawyer, Rhodri Thomas.  Thomas has been publicly accused of being a principal in a criminal conspiracy to defraud, defame, and blacklist a foreign worker whistleblower, Steven Kalavity (SDK). Thomas did this as a practicing senior employment lawyer with global law firm Watson Farley and Williams (WFW).  Norwegian based multi-national corporation Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) UK subsidiary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, 4 The Heights, Weybridge, Surrey, KT13 0NY (PGSUK), engaged WFWs Thomas to “negotiate” the final terms and conditions of an employment termination settlement contract agreement (SCA).  The signing of this “negotiated” SCA ended SDKs career 5 December 2013.  SDK is a USA citizen who was sponsored and employed on a Tier 2 visa by PGSUK.  The SCA contained contractual Confidentiality clauses intended to prohibit parties from disparaging one another.  However, the exception is the publication of protected content, or whistleblowing, as defined by the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA).

The danger of silence | Clint Smith

SDK has published over one-hundred articles and several more image files disparaging PGS and its stakeholders, including WFW and Thomas, since signing the SCA.  One only has to conduct a simple Google™ search to find several of these published images and articles of protected public disclosures.  Obviously, the SCA formed by Thomas is a total disaster.  The sheer number of publications show that Thomas is an incompetent buffoon of a lawyer who did not protect the PGSUK.  Or the publications show that Thomas is a criminal who was bribed to misuse his credentials to protect corrupt and criminal directors and executives.  So, why would EM Law hire a lawyer who was either incompetent or a criminal?  EM Law, in the view of SDK, has become a co-conspirator in the defrauding of multiple international government agencies, corporate shareholders, and of course the foreign-worker whistleblower through bribes or negligence.  Their failure of due diligence has perverted the course of justice and deceived customers.  What evil depravity must exists when law firm employs and helps criminals who have intentionally hurt a law-abiding foreign worker and his family, including young children?  

Thailand Legal Firm Duensing – Kippen and PGS ASA do not Understand Contract Confidentiality Clauses (25 May 2020)
Open Letter to Petroleum Geo-Services ASA Board of Directors (18 June 2017) p124-128
Simple Compliance Questions for Norway’s PGS? (21 June 2019)

Silence implies consent.  The UK Limitation Act 1980 allows one-year from publication date for a party to file a defamation law suit.  One test to determine whether EM Law is an unethical law firm that protects criminals and perverts the course of justice is through reviewing if Thomas has ever initiated any litigation on behalf of his clients or himself for the numerous online publications.  SDK first began publishing content online regarding WFW Thomas’ confidence fraud 3 July 2013 on the LinkedIn™ platform.  The confidence fraud would have never been successful except for the fact that SDK was a foreign worker.  But, the fact that SDK was a USA citizen and sponsored Tier 2 visa meant that PGS, and WFW broke multiple laws more than the one’s that were being covered-up.  Herein lies the problem.  The SCA that Thomas was involved with was illegal and this is why it is impotent.  It is why Thomas will not respond nor comment on any accusatory publication.  No one is compelling Thomas to invoke the Confidentiality terms and conditions.  Why would EM Law rather protect an accused criminal, Thomas, than help a foreign worker whistleblower, SDK?  The accusations with evidence have been posted online since 20 September 2015!  Why isn’t EM Law not a co-conspirator in the (alleged) defrauding of the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the UK Border Agency, and whistleblower SDK?  SDK believes that they are. 



Philip Landau Law – Watson Farley & Williams Confidence Fraud E-mails [10 October 2013 – 5 December 2013]

to:“Oslo, ACS” <>,,,,,,
Rhodri Thomas <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ActionFraud <>,
Carl Richards <>,
GDPR <>,
John Francas <>,
Landau Law <>,
Rhodri Thomas <>,
Tippaya Moonmanee <>
date:Sep 21, 2020, 8:18 AM
subject:Open Letter to EM Law Regarding Employment Lawyer Rhodri Thomas and a Firms Responsibility to Stakeholders


USA POTUS Trump Responds While Norway’s Corporate Corrupt Ignore

Norway’s Irresponsible Equinor, Telenor & PGS ASA Top Corruption List

Norway’s Corruption Problem Denies USA Citizen Whistleblower Due Process and Protects Criminals

The responses received from the Donald Trump White House are not completely generic. Read the two responses and you can see that they are different. The White House had no reason to answer. The Prime Minister of Norway does. After all, it is the people of Norway who are mostly being robbed by the corrupt management of majority state-owned corporations Equinor and Telenor. The common denominator is non-state owned corrupt PGS ASA. The population of Norway is only 5.433 million compared to the population of the USA which is 328.2 million.

No response has ever been received by those whom are publicly disparaged and accused of crimes. All of those named within publications are supposed to be protected by contractual Confidentiality clauses which prohibit such online published disparagement. Of course, the cover-up has persisted because their contract is fraudulent. It is they who have abused their power through remaining silent and not protecting company value and reputation.

SDK, USA Citizen and Victim of Illegal Norwegian Corporation Whistleblower Retaliation

Fraudulent Contracts Confidentiality Clauses Cannot Protect Norwegian Company Reputation and Value

Second Letter to USA President Trump White House

I wrote a letter from this portal to President Donald Trump.  I am grateful for the response that I received.  When people cry out for justice, receiving a simple acknowledgement is sustaining. For the past several years, I have been ignored.  Exposing corruption and injustice is often what we are told to do as good citizens.  What is not told is how brutal retaliation can be toward whistleblowers and their families.  When doing the right thing and playing by the rules is more dangerous than robbing the public that you are supposed to serve, there is a problem.

I have been the victim of workplace mobbing.  It has been stated that the workplace mobbing is like workplace bullying on steroids.  Workplace mobbing is often used as a tactic to oust victims of harassment.  The only difference between harassment and bullying is whether or not you are in a protected class.

Because I was a USA citizen working in a foreign country, I considered that I was not just bullied, but harassed and discriminated against.  But, it was worse than that.  I was denied my legal due process to challenge and stop the abusers.  Instead, corporate boards of directors denied a USA citizen his human rights and created false defamatory employment records to blacklist him.

In the process, Norwegian company PGS ASA has been able to continue lying to and robbing investors.  I cannot accept a world for my children where evil corruption prevails over honest hard work.

I have written multiple letters.  I have written reports to board of directors of Norwegian companies Equinor, Telenor, and PGS ASA and never received a response.  Apparently, robbing stakeholders is more time consuming than leading the free world.

As a US citizen working in a foreign country, I became a whistleblower.  Not by choice, really.  I was duped into believing leadership wanted to do the right thing.  I have since written to the Norway police, the UK police, and even the FBI.  Nobody answers and nobody investigates.

I have written to the Prime Minister of Norway.  I have written to so many people, the White House actually provided a bit more than a simple acknowledgement.

Norwegian state owned (67%) oil company, Equinor this year “lost” lots of money in overseas operations.  Much of this was in the USA.  Here’s the thing, I KNOW that the Chairman of the Board for Equinor is a criminal.  Jon Erik Reinhardsen has been in my cross-hairs for years.  I have published multiple online articles where he is the topic.  Reinhardsen has never invoked contractual Confidentiality clauses prohibiting disparagement because his contract with me was fraudulent and supported by defamatory forged documents.

I want the FBI to compel Reinhardsen to publicly explain the 25 October 2013 Memo about ME.  And then I want him put into handcuffs.  But, only if it coincides with the laws he has broken in order to harm a USA citizen whistleblower and his family.

Thank President Trump.  Being bound by the lies of corrupted power is like being a hostage.  Please free me and my family from the unlawful retaliation.


Steven D. Kalavity


Open Letter to Norway’s Telenor Board of Directors Regarding Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke

PINTEREST Telenor – PGS Compliance Officer Silke Hitschke

Johnny Cash – God’s Gonna Cut You Down (Official Video)

Attention Telenor Board of Directors: 

Gunn Wærsted (Chair), Jørgen Kildahl, Jacob Aqraou, Jon Erik Reinhardsen, Jon Erik Reinhardsen, Sally Davis, Pieter Cornelis Knook, Astrid Simonsen Joos, Anita Helen Steine, Jan Otto Eriksen


US Consulate in Norway :

Norway Police – The National Criminal Investigation Service:

UK ActionFraud (Police):   

Knut Arild Hareide, Norway Minister of Transport:

Erna Solberg, Norway Prime Minister:

Øystein Myrvold, INVESTOR RELATIONS – TELENOR GROUP, Head of Investor Relations,

Kristine Devold, INVESTOR RELATIONS – TELENOR GROUP, Investor Relations Director:

Ethical guidelines should provide guidance on how employees can communicate with the board to report matters related to illegal or unethical conduct by the company. Having clear guidelines for internal communication will reduce the risk that the company may find itself in situations that can damage its reputation or financial standing.

The Norwegian Code of Practice for

PGS UK Contract of Employment Confidentiality / Whistleblowing Terms and Conditions

This restriction shall continue to apply after the termination of a member of staff’s employment without limit in point of time but, both during employment and after its termination, shall cease to apply to information ordered to be disclosed by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction or otherwise required to be disclosed by law or to information which becomes available to the public generally (other than by reason of the member of staff breaching this confidentiality obligation). Nothing in this paragraph 2.9 will prevent a member of staff making a “protected disclosure” within the meaning of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 where they are lawfully entitled to do so.

Each member of staff also agrees that he/she will not, during the course of his/her employment or at any time thereafter either make or publish, or cause to be made or published, to anyone in any circumstances any statement (whether of fact, belief or opinion) which directly or indirectly disparages, is harmful to or damages the reputation or standing of the Company or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents or shareholders.

PGS UK Personnel Handbook: 2.9 Confidentiality (2013)

Telenor Board of Directors:

This letter relates to current Telenor director, Jon Erik Reinhardsen and Telenor Chief Compliance Officer, Silke Hitschke.  Reinhardsen and Hitschke should be investigated for criminal retaliation and human rights abuses against a foreign worker whistleblower.  If the whistleblower allegations are confirmed true, then Reinhardsen and Hitschke should be terminated from their roles with Telenor and prosecuted under relevant laws and jurisdictions.  Reinhardsen and Hitschke are accused of violating the laws of several countries:  Norway, United Kingdom (England), United States of America (US), and Thailand.

PGS ASA Does not Respond to nor Investigate Whistleblowing (18 July 2019)

On 18 May 2020, PGS ASA (PGS) UK Head of Legal, John Francas demanded that disparaging and defamatory publications be removed from the Internet.  This was the last e-mail directly received by USA citizen and whistleblower, Steven Kalavity (SDK).  Prior to receiving this e-mail, Francas had e-mailed that SDK was in breach of two compromise agreements signed in Thailand on 11 November 2018 to stop the processing of two criminal defamation claims citing Thai criminal law.  One claim was sponsored by PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY (PGSUK) and the other by former PGSUK secretary, Carl Richards, who resigned from PGS as PGS UK Head of Legal 25 May 2018.  The Directors of PGSUK are currently Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS CEO and President; Gottfred Langseth, PGS CFO and EVP and Christin Steen-Nilsen, PGS SVP Chief Accountant.  PGSUK is an English company and its two contracts with SDK are governed by the laws of England.

PINTEREST Watson Farley & Williams

SDK is the victim of crimes perpetrated against him and his family in retaliation for whistleblowing.  For several years, US citizen SDK was employed by different subsidiaries of Norwegian company, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) globally.  In 2013, SDK was sponsored and employed with contract by PGSUK.  This original employment contract (OEC) was governed by the laws of England.  At that time, the PGSUK Directors were Reinhardsen, PGS CEO and President, Langseth, Steen-Nilsen.  Through 13 September 2013, the PGSUK secretary was Candida Pinto. Richards assumed the role after 13 September 2013.  Through e-mail responses to Francas, SDK pointed out to PGS that their copying of SDK passport to initiate the Thailand litigation was a US federal crime, as were his e-mailed extortion threats.  Similarly, the Thailand legal firm representing current PGSUK directors illegally copied SDK passport information and received SDK in-country residence information so that Duensing – Kippen could stalk and harass SDK and his Thai relatives.  Francas and PGS Data Protection Officer (DPO), Daphne Bjerke, had been provided with SDK personal identification data for the explicit purpose of confirming identity to process a subject access request (SAR), citing the new General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR) delivered to PGS in June 2018.

The Thai compromise agreement was signed by SDK under the threat of criminal prosecution in Thailand, with a possible 2-5 years prison sentence.  The compromise agreements main function was to have evidence of criminal behavior de-published and to scare SDK into silence.  Under Norwegian law, such agreements are illegal.  PIDA states that contracts which are designed to silence protected qualified disclosure – whistleblowing – are not enforceable.  PGS has always known that I was a US citizen.  The Thai compromise agreement was written to be enforceable in Harris County / Houston, Texas, USA.  Reinhardsen remains a Director and Chairman of PGS US subsidiary, Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc. (PGSUS), along with Langseth, Steen-Nilsen.  PGS has no offices in Thailand.  But, if the Thailand agreements are illegal extortion/blackmail, Reinhardsen, Langseth, Steen-Nilsen, Pedersen, Mysen, Richards, and Francas should be held accountable for the misrepresentation.  If the SCA is not a legal contract, but an illegal instrument intended to defame and silence a whistleblower, how can the Thailand compromise agreements not be fraudulent as well? 

An American, the UK Data Protection Act, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Tyranny of “Accurate Data” (3-Jul-2015)

SDKs employment with PGS ended with the signing of a termination settlement contract agreement (SCA) the end of 2013.  The SCA was similarly governed by the laws of England.  Both the OCE and SCA contained contractual Confidentiality clauses which are intended to prohibit an employee from publicly disclosing information that disparages a company or any of its stakeholders.  Being contracts governed by the laws of England, they cited the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) intended to protect the integrity of personal data being processed by data controllers – employers, as well as the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) which is intended to protect retaliation for whistleblowing.  PIDA is supposed to protect whistleblowers from adverse actions or retaliation by their employers.  Making a disclosure in the public interest, or whistleblowing is different from simply disparaging content.  Workers are to be protected when the public disclosure consists of information where the worker reasonably believes that there has been a criminal offence, breach of a legal obligation, a miscarriage of justice, a danger to the health and safety of any individual, damage to the environment, or the deliberate attempt to conceal any such acts.

Such Confidentiality clauses are sometimes misused by corrupt organizations to retaliate and silence whistleblowers so that they cannot expose wrong-doing.  If SDK published online that Telenor Director, Reinhardsen was a “lying criminal asshole” or that Hitschke were a “lying criminal bitch”, this would be a breach of both the Confidentiality terms and conditions in both the OEC and SCA and PGSUK could take legal action against SDK citing a breach of contract governed by the laws of England.  In fact, SDK has published such content online multiple times since July 2015.  Reinhardsen is the former PGS CEO and President and Hitschke a former PGS Compliance Officer.  Reinhardsen and Hitschke have never been held accountable to invoke contractual Confidentiality terms and conditions intended to protect company – PGS or Telenor – reputation and value.  It can be reasoned that no invocation implies admission that the accusations that Reinhardsen and Hitschke are criminals.  The publications may be disparaging, but the published accusations and evidence are reasonably thought to be true and therefore protected.  So, why doesn’t the Telenor Board of Directors compel Reinhardsen and Hitschke to invoke the Confidentiality clauses to protect Telenor shareholder value and reputation?  Why is Telenor not abiding by the Norwegian Code of Practice for Corporate Governance

It was an event of 13 June 2013 that has been the catalyst of SDKs online qualified public disclosure which began 3 July 2015.  On 13 June 2013, SDK was called to a surprise ambush meeting – a tactic used by toxic workplace bullies and harassers.  The ambushers were David Nicholson, PGS UK HR Manager, SDKs immediate supervisor, Edward von Abendorff, VP Marine Contract Africa – Sales and his superior, Simon Cather, Marine Contract Africa Region President.  Following the abusive ambush meeting that did not follow PGS policy, SDK requested minutes of the meeting, how the meeting comported to PGS policy, and a request to file a grievance.  The right for an employee to file a grievance is provided under the laws for England and contract.  PGS did not comply with any of SDKs requests.  On 24 July 2013, in lieu minutes from the 13 June 2013 ambush meeting, Nicholson delivered an ambush letter signed by him on behalf of PGSUK Directors, Reinhardsen, Langseth, Steen-Nilsen.  These events have been the impetus of a whistleblower’s pursuit of truth and justice which the PGS sponsored litigation was intent on obstructing.

In fact, the ambush letter was intended to obstruct SDKs legal right to submit a grievance and proceed through the grievance procedures.  SDK was being mobbed and harassed, lied to constantly and having information withheld, as a sponsored Tier 2 visa foreign worker!  PGS had a legal duty of care responsibility to ensure the health, safety and welfare for SDK and his family.  Workplace bullying and harassment are listed on the top of the list for workplace hazards.  The subject of the ambush letter was the Investigation for possible implementation of a Performance Improvement Plan with a scheduled discussion on 11 September 2013.  The 11 September 2013 meeting was rescheduled for 20 September 2013.    On 13 September 2013, PGS UK Head of Legal, Richards, replaced Candida Pinto, PGS UK In-house Lawyer, as PGSUK Secretary.  On 20 September 2013, SDK delivered a grievance document (“Grievance”) to PGS executives regarding acts perpetrated by PGSUK executives. 

On 15 July 2013, PGS applied to renew their sponsorship for SDK to and his family to remain in England.  A Tier 2 visa requires that the foreign worker possess skills not available in the EEA / resident (non-immigrant) labor market.  In other words, SDK would not have been issued a Tier 2 visa if he was a poor performer.  The ambush letter was retaliation for intending to raise a grievance over workplace bullying, defamatory performance ratings, and the non-compliant ambush meeting.  SDK did not fully realize it at the time, but the Grievance met the PIDA criteria of whistleblowing.  In response to the Grievance, PGS proffered an SCA.  In the UK, the employee must seek the counsel of a lawyer prior to signing any SCA that will end their employment.  Any seasoned English employment lawyer should have recognized the Grievance as whistleblowing.  But, my counsel, Philip Landau and Holly Rushton did not.  Landau recommended that SDK pursue an enhanced SCA and not proceed through the steps prescribed within the PGS UK Personnel Handbook. 

PGS contracted legal firm Watson, Farley and Williams (WFW) to negotiate the terms and conditions of the final signed SCA.  Senior Employment lawyer, Rhodri Thomas also seemed not to recognize the 21-page Grievance as whistleblowing either?  One would think that Thomas, Landau, and Rushton would have recognized issues with an SCA for a foreign worker for performance, especially when the Grievance specifically cited misuse of the performance management system, bullying, harassment, discrimination (Equality Act 2010), and a breach of contractual duty of care responsibilities (Health and Safety Act 1974).  SDK was reluctant to sign the SCA as the negotiations just did not seem right.  SDK was also desperate to extricate himself and his family from the hostile sponsors.  SDK made one non-negotiable demand: the contents held within SDKs professional personnel file had to be true and accurate.  Landau, Rushton, and Thomas (PGS) promised that it was on 4 December 2013 as condition for SDK signing the final SCA on 5 December 2013. 

In October 2014, SDK submitted his first SAR to PGS citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA).  GDPR replaced DPA in 2018.  Through an SAR, data controllers, such as employers, provide data subjects with copies of the personal data that they process for a data subject, or employee.  The principal data processor for the 2014 SAR was Nicholson.  The same Nicholson who had been accused of malpractice, defamation, bullying, and harassment within the Grievance.  When SDK received the contents of his PGS professional personnel file it was discovered that PGS was processing forged and inaccurate defamatory personnel records.  None of the pertinent documents were signed by SDK.  In fact, most were signed by only Nicholson.  However, there was one significant document, a 25 October 2013 Memo (“Memo”) signed Bjølseth, who was Nicholson’s superior, and PGS EVP Marine Contract, Per Arild Reksnes, who was Cather’s superior.  Neither Bjølseth or Reksnes were agents of PGSUK.  

SDK complained through several e-mails to PGS Nicholson, PGS UK HR Officer Laura Haswell, and Bjølseth from November – December 2014.  On 22 December 2014, Nicholson again signed and delivered an extortion letter again on behalf of PGSUK.  The extortion letter threatened legal action for a breach in the SCA against SDK if he did not cease disputing the obviously fake contents of his PGS personnel file.  SDK emailed several complaints to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who oversee DPA compliance.  ICO would not investigate!  In August 2015, SDK submitted his first report to UK ActionFraud (police).  The UK police also did not investigate.  However, SDK believed then as he believes now that he was defrauded and defamed by a criminal corporate international conspiracy including PGS, WFW Thomas, as well as LZW Landau and Rushton.

On 3 July 2015, SDK published online the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform his first protected public disclosure.  SDK published on 6 September 2015 and 20 September 2015 articles stating explicitly that Reinhardsen should resign as CEO and President of PGS for malpractice and mismanagement.  No breach of the SCA was ever invoked, in spite of the threats made within the 22 December 2014 letter.  In April 2016, SDK submitted another SAR to the PGS Compliance team.  In spite of the several articles published on LinkedIn™ by that time, PGS did not comment or deliver any data to SDK for the 2016 SAR.  In June 2016, SDK submitted a complaint to the PGS Compliance Hotline claiming that PGS bribed lawyers to process forged defamatory documents used to terminate foreign worker SDK on false pretenses.  SDK suppled substantive documented evidence.  Hitschke, and the other members of the Compliance team, Bjølseth and Pedersen, issued the following response to SDKs substantive complaint:

20 May 2016

Mr. Kalavity

PGS has followed up your complaint through the Compliance Hotline in accordance with our procedures.  No deviation from PGS’ procedures of guidelines were uncovered and none of the documents paced in your personal employee folder was found to contain false or misleading information about you.  No evidence found indicate that you were defrauded.  The case dealing with your complaint is hereby closed.

SDK began posting more questions and facts in the PGS LinkedIn™ comment space.  PGS again did not cite violations in the Confidentiality terms and conditions.  PGS did not chose to respond by non-public e-mails, but instead deleted the comments and questions.  Eventually, through PGS (stakeholder) complaints, SDK was restricted from LinkedIn™ and essentially silenced.  PGS was allowed to avoid litigation under the Confidentiality terms and conditions guided by the laws of England.  PGS has intentionally ignored SDKs questions and concerns.  Not acknowledging, or the silent treatment, is an attempt by abusers to control and harass.  It does not represent anything positive.  Not acknowledging is very harmful. Not only does it demonstrate immaturity and meanness, but such behavior can have serious health consequences for the other person who will tend to feel extremely distressed.  Common symptoms are headaches and digestive problems, along with fatigue and insomnia.  PGS stated that there was an investigation.  This was a blatant lie and cover-up.  No answers were provided for the multitude of questions asked of PGS Compliance.  SDK also shared articles and links with PGS, WFW, and LZW personnel (Landau, Rushton, Thomas, etc.) through the internal LinkedIn™ messaging service.  PGS’ fraudulent response also defamed SDK to the entire LinkedIn™ and oil and gas professional community.

17 August 2016

Mr. Kalavity:

The PGS internal audit team has investigated your complaints following your report to the PGS Compliance Hotline.  The investigation confirmed that PGS policies and legal requirements were followed in the matter you have raised for our attention.  Following the investigation, we have closed the matter in accordance with our procedures for handling reports to the PGS Compliance Hotline.  The results and conclusion have been delivered to you by the Hotline service.  PGS will as such not make further comments in this matter and further posts by you on our LinkedIn site related to the matter may be removed by us.

PINTEREST LinkedIn™ PGS East Shetland Deleted Comments Slides 300×700

Because PGS, WFW, and LZW (Landau Law) took no legal action with respect to the published content on LinkedIn™ that disparaged their professional performance, SDK was able to re-published the articles which had been on LinkedIn™ on a private site,  Unfortunately, SDK had over 4600 personal professional connection and also hosted a Marine Seismic Survey group with over 1560 members when PGS decided to lie to the professional community on LinkedIn™ and got SDK restricted.  PGS irresponsibly, from both the professional and contractual perspective, did not engage and resolve the issue, but continued the criminal conspiracy and cover-up that continues to damage whistleblower SDK and his family.  Nothing within the Compliance Hotline team issued statement is true.  The Compliance Hotline team (Bjølseth, Pedersen, Hitschke), are obstructing justice and protecting the criminal cabal of which they are all part.  None of document contents pertinent to SDKs termination bare his signature and are unverifiable.  The documents cannot possibly be compliant, because they are forgeries! 

The fake personnel file documents reference events that never happened and documents that do not exists.  No one with qualified privilege from PGS has signed the documents with SDKs personnel file.  The only other official communications directly from PGS regarding SDKs published online content came from Francas in May 2019.  Most threatening correspondence was received from Duensing – Kippen lawyer Tippaya Moonmanee.  Moonmanee had no direct knowledge of events.  PGS provided Duensing – Kippen with an illegal power of attorney to avoid the laws of England which bound her clients.  England has no criminal defamation statute and content published more than one-year was protected from defamation claims by the UK Limitation Act 1980.  The reason that PGS needed to use the Thailand legal system, and not the English legal system, is because there is obviously a problem with the SCA contract.  Telenor’s Reinhardsen and Hitschke are both implicated in the alleged assault, fraud, forgery, bribery, embezzlement and extortion intended to knowingly harm a whistleblower and his family.  This is why conspirators did not conduct a valid investigation and real report.

Was Withholding my Occupational Health Nurse Report from me OK? (22 April 2019)

Following the meeting, I asked David Nicholson, UK HR Manager, if minutes of the meeting had been taken to record the content and context of the meeting. I was told that the meeting was informal, and as such no minutes of the meeting were formally transcribed and distributed to participants. (Although, HR had annotated notes of the meeting while the meeting was in progress.)

I not only disagreed with the base assertions made during the meeting (and subsequent letter), but I was additionally distressed at the intimidating urgency and tone of the meeting that I was called to moments before it occurred. (There was an apology for my being ambushed into such an intimidating arena.)

Excerpt from 20 September 2020 SDK Grievance

During SCA negotiations, Nicholson requested that SDKs health be assessed by Occupational Health Nurse (OHN), Maggie Bream.  The OHN delivered the assessment report for SDK to Nicholson.  Landau was made aware of this.  The OHN report contradicts the PGS false narrative contained within the forged defamatory documents that supported a performance-based termination and dismissed harassment, bullying, and discrimination claims.  Nicholson never delivered the final report to SDK, as the OHN requested.  (SDK acquired a copy of the OHN report following the 2014 SAR.)  The PGS UK Personnel Handbook and UK law has provisions for stressed employees.  In spite of this, PGS, Landau, Rushton and Thomas did not consider the OHN report during SCA negotiations?  They did not consider news about the physical and mental impact that the PGS toxic work conditions and ongoing gaslighting had on SDK and his family, even though the Grievance which is cited within the final SCA explained these negative effects.  Workplace harassment and bullying can create stress and anxiety.  It is one of the most significant contributors of stress-related health problems, including debilitating feelings of anxiety, panic attacks and clinical depression. In some instances, bullying can even lead to suicide. 

The reason why PGS, WFW (Thomas) and LZW (Landau and Rushton) have not cited any breach in the SCA is because they also know that the SCA is not a legitimate contract.  SDKs was denied legal due process and representation because PGS bribed LZW to support their crimes.  SDK continues to be denied this basic human right in addition to the human rights of the parties all processing fake personal data.  The fake SCA negotiations – gaslighting – lasted from 10 October 2013 until 5 December 2013, when SDK eventually signed the SCA.  Toxic organizations misuse HR and promotions as a payment for covering-up executive crimes.  It starts a cycle where incompetence and unethical behavior is rewarded.  Toxic workplaces cheat to hide incompetence.  In a functional and just system, Reinhardsen and Hitschke would first likely never exist.  But, if such alleged criminal conspirators were thoroughly and fairly investigated, Reinhardsen and Hitschke would be dismissed, and possibly tried, and sent to prison. 

Telenor’s fifty-four percent (54%) Norwegian citizen owned.  The Telenor compliance and governance system that does not investigate Reinhardsen and Hitschke is dysfunctional.  A system that does not conduct thorough due diligence and rewards the corrupt is not serving stakeholders.  It is the very definition of corruption.  It is the most abhorrent kind of behavior.  The victims of executive harassment and discrimination are shocked the policy and values which underpin the contractual relationship are not followed.  It is both a breach and a betrayal of the employer – employee relationship.  All workplace bullying is supported by incompetent and insecure hierarchical authoritative leadership.  It is incompetence that drives most all corruption.  Toxic workplaces do not exist under strong ethical leadership.  Strong ethical leadership is competent, competitive and confident that any challenge to their company reputation and value will likely never happen and if it does, they only need to respond appropriately.

This abuse of power or position can cause such chronic stress and anxiety that people gradually lose belief in themselves, suffering physical ill health and mental distress as a result. Workplace bullying affects working conditions, health and safety, domestic life and the right of all to equal opportunity and treatment.

(Lamplugh, 2002).

In 2013, I could have never even imagined the corruption and criminal behavior that was being orchestrated to silence and harm me and my family.  Being lied to, harassed, bullied, mobbed and gaslighted by the compliance and governance professionals from several foreign organizations for any period of time is very distressing.  Reinhardsen and Hitschke have been obstructing justice and harassing SDK and his family for years.  As a US citizen, the threats and extortion made through e-mail and post, obstruction of justice, abuse of power and misrepresentations constitute violations in the US federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).  Unfortunately, whistleblowers are too often brutally retaliated against even when there are laws designed to protect them.  When PGS lawyers Pedersen, Richards, Mysen and Francas, WFW lawyers Thomas and Aulak, and most abhorrently, the whistleblowers own counsel, Landau and Rushton, are bribed to obstruct justice without penalty, compliance programs are merely a façade. Consider being in a foreign country as a sponsored contracted worker? 

Reinhardsen and Hitschke are part of a criminal conspiracy to continue to defraud, defame, physically and financially damage a whistleblower and his family.  Reinhardsen and Hitschke have been allowed to not invoke the Confidentiality terms and conditions which would reveal this criminal conspiracy.  Invoking the contractual Confidentiality terms and conditions of the SCA would expose that Reinhardsen and Hitschke oversaw the bribing of lawyers and the embezzling of company funds to pay for the mischief.   The original SCA was illegally proffered in retaliation for blowing the whistle and to silence the whistleblower.  The illegal retaliation, silence and harassment of a whistleblower must end.  Demand that Reinhardsen and Hitschke explain the 2016 remarks and produce their investigation report. 

Regards, SDK   

from:Steven Kalavity 
to:“Oslo, ACS” <>,,
AF Team <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ActionFraud <>,
Carl Richards <>,
GDPR <>,
John Francas <>,
Landau Law <>,
Rhodri Thomas <>,
Tippaya Moonmanee <>
date:Sep 7, 2020, 10:56 AM
subject:Open Letter to the Telenor Board of Directors
PINTEREST – PGS ASA Human Resources Kristin Omreng – Gareth Jones


« Older posts