Submitted by Rachel Maria (Weber) Kisellus

Regarding Employment with Watershed Sciences

1. Employment Timeline & Duties

I was employed as a field scientist with Watershed Sciences (Watershed → Quantum Spatial → now NV5) during 2011-2012. My role involved physically demanding fieldwork, often in remote locations, including time spent alone in extreme conditions, sometimes with aircraft pilots and other contracted staff.

2. Physical Decline & Requests for Support

During the course of my work, I began experiencing significant physical and emotional deterioration ~ exhaustion, joint instability, and systemic collapse consistent with undiagnosed hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS). I communicated multiple times, including in writing via email, that I was being worked beyond safe limits.

In one case, I was alone in the field with a helicopter pilot who had been drinking heavily the night before. I expressed concern about the safety risks and my inability to continue operating under those conditions.

3. Emotional & Physical Collapse

Eventually, I reached a point where I informed the team I was done ~ that I needed to go home. I used language to the effect that I had been “crushed.” I was experiencing significant distress and system breakdown.

I made it explicitly clear that I could no longer safely or reasonably continue. This was not a casual resignation. It was a plea for recognition of harm.

4. Replacement with a Vulnerable Worker

In response, the company attempted to replace me in the field with a young, newly promoted female technician named Heather, who I believe may have also been living with hEDS or a similar condition. She exhibited the characteristic craniofacial features common in connective tissue disorders and had been mocked or not taken seriously by others on the team.

This moment clarified for me that the company’s response was not rooted in safety or adaptation ~ but in replacement and disposability. Rather than listen to my warning, they redirected the same danger toward someone more vulnerable.

5. Constructive Discharge

Although I was not formally fired, I did not leave freely. I left because the conditions were unlivable, unsafe, and worsening ~ and because my voiced concerns were ignored or deflected. I now understand this qualifies as a constructive discharge.

The working environment, the physical harm, the dismissal of serious safety risks, and the attempt to place another vulnerable person into the same harmful position rendered continued employment impossible.

6. Current Action

I am now exploring legal advice regarding ADA protections, constructive discharge, and potential employer negligence. I have preserved emails that document these exchanges.