Posts Tagged ‘harassment law’

Update: Mich. high court throws out Chrysler harassment award

It won’t come as much surprise to readers of our May 31, 2001 item (“Fieger’s firecrackers frequently fizzle”) that the Michigan Supreme Court has thrown out controversial attorney Geoffrey Fieger’s $20 million jury win on behalf of Linda Gilbert, a female millwright harassed by co-workers at a Chrysler assembly plant in Detroit. “The jury verdict is so excessive and so clearly the product of passion and prejudice that there can be no justification for the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial,” wrote Justice Robert Young Jr. in the majority opinion. Three dissenting justices on the seven-member court thought that reducing the award would be adequate remedy for the problems with the trial. (David Eggert, “Michigan Supreme Court Overturns $21 Million Verdict Against DaimlerChrysler”, AP/Law.com, Jul. 23). More: Dawson Bell, “Harassment verdict is overturned”, Detroit Free Press, Jul. 23; Ernie the Attorney.

Worker’s comp: trauma over visitor’s remark

New Jersey: “County freeholders Tuesday paid nearly $26,000 to a Crest Haven Nursing Home employee who claimed she suffered a psychiatric disorder in 2001 after a nursing home visitor made an inappropriate remark to her.” Nursing assistant Cynthia Allen, a longtime employee whose lawyer said she had a good work record, “alleged that she was feeding another patient in late December 2000 when a nursing home visitor said ‘I bet you have some fresh stuff.'” Although the visitor later denied saying anything and no one else heard the comment, Allen said it had been made in a sexually offensive way and that she had felt intimidated when seeing the visitor on two subsequent occasions. Medical experts agreed that she had suffered psychological trauma over the incident. A freeholder who voted for the payment nonetheless termed it “bizarre” and said “This is what’s wrong with our legal system.” (W. F. Keough, “Visitor?s remark to worker at Crest Haven costs county $26,000 in compensation claim”, Press of Atlantic City, Jun. 23 (reg)).

Mistook dance floor for conference workshop

New Hampshire: “Attorney General Peter Heed resigned abruptly Tuesday because of an allegation of inappropriate conduct with a woman. Gov. Craig Benson said the alleged incident occurred at a conference last month in Bretton Woods on preventing sexual and domestic abuse. …WMUR-TV reported that the alleged incident occurred after hours on a dance floor.” (Kate McGann, “New Hampshire A.G. Heed resigns over misconduct allegation”, Boston Globe, Jun. 15).

N.J. bans bars’ “Ladies’ Nights”, supposed beneficiaries glum

“Why, after all, would a bar offer discounts to women? Not because the owner harbors a deep-seated hostility toward men, perpetuating centuries of oppression. People who run such establishments understand that a lot of men patronize taverns partly to meet women, and that they will come more often and stay longer if women are abundant than if they are scarce….[I]n New Jersey, unreasonableness rules.” (Steve Chapman, “Putting the brakes on ladies’ nights”, Chicago Tribune, Jun. 6). See also Aug. 4, 2003 (Calif.)

Court to sitcom writers: dirty jokes are actionable

Amaani Lyle was fired four months into her job for Warner Brothers as a writers’ assistant on “Friends” because she couldn’t type fast enough to record the writers’ dictation accurately. She sued for sexual harassment because the comedy writers would regularly make jokes about women and sex in the process of writing a sitcom about the sexual adventures of six thirty-somethings. A California appeals court has decided that a jury should resolve whether the jokes made by the comedy writers were appropriate for writing a sitcom or whether they created an actionable “hostile working environment for women.” Summary judgment was affirmed with respect to the dismissal of her lawsuit against NBC, because NBC did not have the right to hire or fire writers’ assistants on the television show, but the court reversed the award of attorneys’ fees. (“C.A. Limits ?Creative Necessity? Defense in ?Friends? Harassment Case”, Metropolitan News-Enterprise, Apr. 22; AP, Apr. 22; Lyle v. Warner Bros. Television Prod. opinion). Updates: Jul. 19, Jul. 31.

Am I fired, darling?

Workers at the English National Opera have been banned from using the term of endearment “darling” to each other. “The policy, set out in a document called Dignity at Work, singles out the word ‘darling’ as part of a code of conduct which addresses workplace protocol. It tells employees: ‘The use of affectionate names such as ‘darling’ may constitute sexual harassment.'”. A grievance procedure is available for those who are made uncomfortable by hearing the word. (“‘Darling’ ban for opera workers”, BBC, Apr. 22). A spokesman, however, said there was a grandfather clause: “Existing staff who call each other ‘darling’ can continue to do so but, if someone started here on Monday, they could not.” (“‘Darling’ banned for new workers at English National Opera”, Ananova, Apr. 22). “This is simply guidance for employees — we are protecting ourselves and them,” said spokesman Anthony McNeill. “We live in a litigious society.” (AP/Andante, Apr. 22).

Movie theater pays $3M for relationship gone bad

You’re looking at the headline and thinking that a victim of sexual harassment got a windfall, but the plaintiff was 52-year-old movie theater manager Gary Trepanier. Trepanier was dating a part-time concessions worker; the movie theater chain, National Amusements, found out about the relationship when he filed for a personal protection order against her phone calls after the relationship ended, and fired him for favoring the employee. Trepanier’s lawyer, Glen Lenhoff, claimed this violated the Michigan Whistleblower’s Act, and a jury awarded $1M in past and future wages and $2M for past and future mental anguish. (Ken Palmer, “Jury awards $3 million in cinema manager’s firing”, Flint Journal, Apr. 8).

Prosecuting the innocent, without consequences

Yesterday’s (Sunday’s) New York Post ran my review of Dorothy Rabinowitz’s just-out-in-softcover No Greater Tyrannies, about abuse-hysteria prosecutions. An excerpt: “In 1696, four years after the Salem executions, the Massachusetts colony held a day of contrition and collective soul-searching. Today, the persecutors seldom apologize; instead they tend to rise upward. Scott Harshbarger, D.A. in the Amirault case, went on to become attorney general of his state and now heads Common Cause, in which capacity he lectures the rest of us on ethics and good government.” (Walter Olson, “Salem Is Still With Us”, New York Post, Mar. 21). The New York Times reports that wrongful convictions, even when serious prosecutorial error or misconduct is involved and even when the accused was evidently innocent, seldom result in any career consequences for local prosecutors (Andrea Elliott and Benjamin Weiser, “When Prosecutors Err, Others Pay the Price”, New York Times, Mar. 21). And the Wall Street Journal has reprinted Ms. Rabinowitz’s column about the amazing ordeal gastroenterologist Patrick Griffin went through on charges of sexually abusing a patient, which culminated in his eventual acquittal on retrial — though by that point his medical license had been yanked and his practice was in ruins (“The Doctor’s Story”, Wall Street Journal, May 24, 2000). (via GruntDoc) (see also Jan. 8, Sept. 1)

Insensitivity sought; win cash prizes

The province of Nova Scotia “is offering cash prizes to people who spot ‘offensive’ language in newspaper and magazine articles related to mental health and suicide. Readers who pick out inappropriate language will be entered into a draw for prizes worth up to $2,000. Included on the list of are such words and phrases as ‘basket-case, cracked-up, crazed, demented, fruitcake, kooky, loony, lost their marbles, lunatic, madman, maniac, nutcase, and schizo.'” (“Nova Scotia urges media to watch its language”, CTV, Mar. 7; “Are these guys nuts?” (editorial), National Post, Mar. 4; “Here’s an idea that really is nuts” (editorial), Montreal Gazette, Mar. 5; Mark Steyn, “Beware of the fruitcakes in government”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 9)(via Tongue Tied).