What is the consistency of evidence at a hearing where a former safety manager testified that the vice president wanted to get rid of him as soon as the fines were finalized?

Using that test in Faryna v. Chorny, I found the former safety manager’s evidence to be consistent throughout. First, his testimony at the hearing reflected the information he had previously provided in writing in his July 3, 2012 statement. Next, his testimony was consistent with the worker’s email to him in June 2012, in which the worker asked the former safety manager whether he remembered his warning to the worker about the vice president’s comments. Specifically, the worker asked the former safety manager whether he remembered warning the worker the vice president wanted to get rid of him as soon as “wcb fines were finalized”, and the former safety manager had responded by writing that he remembered that conversation quite well, and that he would put something on paper. I find this is evidence recorded closer to the time of the events that is consistent with the former safety manager’s testimony.