If Infor's took action as a result of bringing the discrimination case, could it be possible that the employee was suspended rather than terminated? This would account for Infor stating that she was still (technically) employed. This would also explain Oracle's actions.
Not being familiar with 'murica, is it common there to fire people purely because they have brought legal proceedings against another unconnected company?
Why would oracle use a personal gmail address unless it had been provided by the employee? Having provided a personal address, why would it not be monitored?
Smells to me like a case for Hanlon's Razor.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
