PDA

View Full Version : Sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain



caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 09:57 AM
I have been watching MSNBC covering this "story". Does anybody see any difference in the way the press handles this story and the way it handled the story when Clinton was SUED by a former employee of the state of Arkansas?

Furthermore has anybody had to handle a sexual harassment charge of someone who worked for them?

road kill
10-31-2011, 10:00 AM
I have been watching MSNBC covering this "story". Does anybody see any difference in the way the press handles this story and the way it handled the story when Clinton was SUED by a former employee of the state of Arkansas?

Furthermore has anybody had to handle a sexual harassment charge of someone who worked for them?
Huge difference.

In this story, there were NO charges, but it's a big deal.

In Clintons case, there WERE charges and it was no big deal.

See what I am sayin'????



RK

BonMallari
10-31-2011, 10:54 AM
I have been watching MSNBC covering this "story". Does anybody see any difference in the way the press handles this story and the way it handled the story when Clinton was SUED by a former employee of the state of Arkansas?

Furthermore has anybody had to handle a sexual harassment charge of someone who worked for them?

its Anita Hill vs Clarence Thomas all over again, face it the lib left is scared of a potential conservative candidate that happens to be black..very scared


as for facing sexual harrassment charges, yes...unfortunately was part of a class action suit when I worked for a restaurant/night club chain way back when, but I was excluded from the suit when they found out that one of the plaintiffs was my live in girlfriend...the suit was all about money, the ringleader we later found out had sued two other previous employers, and was looking for a payday

I am not saying harrassment, especially the sexual kind doesnt exist in many workplaces, but the charge is very easy to make and extremely difficult to defend, just about any comment can be twisted and misconstrued as sexual in nature

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 11:15 AM
its Anita Hill vs Clarence Thomas all over again, face it the lib left is scared of a potential conservative candidate that happens to be black..very scared


as for facing sexual harrassment charges, yes...unfortunately was part of a class action suit when I worked for a restaurant/night club chain way back when, but I was excluded from the suit when they found out that one of the plaintiffs was my live in girlfriend...the suit was all about money, the ringleader we later found out had sued two other previous employers, and was looking for a payday

I am not saying harrassment, especially the sexual kind doesnt exist in many workplaces, but the charge is very easy to make and extremely difficult to defend, just about any comment can be twisted and misconstrued as sexual in nature

I brought that up because I was once president of a non profit organization and had supervisor responsibility of the manager. Trying to deal with the board of directors, the employee filing charges, and the lawer represinting us and the manager who was accused was a task that challenged anything I have ever dealt with. A nightmare I would wish on no one.No matter what you do, you will be wrong from one perspective or another.

Buzz
10-31-2011, 12:08 PM
It is only as big a deal as conservative voters think it is.

Neither me nor my wife ever voted for Clinton. For years I could not stand the sight of him or the sound of his voice.

road kill
10-31-2011, 12:17 PM
It is only as big a deal as conservative voters think it is.

Neither me nor my wife ever voted for Clinton. For years I could not stand the sight of him or the sound of his voice.

In all honesty, he looks pretty good right now!:rolleyes:


RK

Jim Danis
10-31-2011, 01:20 PM
It's amazing how everything in the story quotes Anonymous Sources. Whenever the press tries to take someone down it's always with Anonymous Sources. Nothing is ever proved.

road kill
10-31-2011, 01:30 PM
It's amazing how everything in the story quotes Anonymous Sources. Whenever the press tries to take someone down it's always with Anonymous Sources. Nothing is ever proved.
Sort of like the Duke Lacrosse team???


RK

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 02:13 PM
Just turned on TV to MSNBC with Andrea Mitchel. She ended her broadcast with a report on Cain report. MSNBC must have inteerviewed and feported on the story at least 3 hours so far today. Wouldn't be surprised to see them run with the story for at least 6 hours a day for a week or more.

As Buzz said, I am sure they want to make sure that conservatives get the story so they will run it over and over and over and over ad infinitim.

News Nation has started and first 12 minutes with interviews of 4 speculating on what happened, his responses ect for the first 12 minutes. They described it as an "EXPLOSIVE STORY" and speculated as to what the truth really is and what he is hiding. Yes Buzz, they are making sure all their conservative viewers get the WHOLE story over and over and over again and again and again. Certainly at least for the next week or two, or four or six, or eight or forever.

Buzz
10-31-2011, 02:13 PM
Sorta like that FOX News article tying ACORN to Occupy Wall Street. Go to that story and do an "edit - find" then type in sources. Not once are the "sources" identified.

My guess is that the sources for this story are in the Perry campaign or the Romney campaign, or both...

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 02:20 PM
Sorta like that FOX News article tying ACORN to Occupy Wall Street. Go to that story and do an "edit - find" then type in sources. Not once are the "sources" identified.

My guess is that the sources for this story are in the Perry campaign or the Romney campaign, or both...
You keep spitting out that bull s%%%t claiming they tyed ACORN to OWL. WRONG. They identified former emloyees of ACORN that were participating in the protest.

You keep making false accusations and I will keep correcting them.

cpj
10-31-2011, 02:48 PM
The left has to keep Romney in front. They know Obama can beat him.

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 03:09 PM
Well MSNC made it 47 minutes before they had another rondtable discussion about the Cain allegations and speculation on how he has handled it and on and on and on.

Franco
10-31-2011, 03:28 PM
Neoconservative Fox News is all over it so, they must be againts other neoconservatives;-)

Two woman, two five-figure settlements and Cain said he isn't aware of them? hum, sounds fishy

Both woman have agreed to not talk or they will be liable for the money they were given to keep quite as well as punitive damages.

road kill
10-31-2011, 03:30 PM
Neoconservative Fox News is all over it so, they must be againts other neoconservatives;-)

Two woman, two five-figure settlements and Cain said he isn't aware of them? hum, sounds fishy

Both woman have agreed to not talk or they will be liable for the money they were given to keep quite as well as punitive damages.


I'll tell you what's fishy.....gettin' whooped by St Louis!!!!

WTH??????:shock:


RK

Franco
10-31-2011, 03:45 PM
I'll tell you what's fishy.....gettin' whooped by St Louis!!!!

WTH??????:shock:


RK

Worse game of the Sean Payton/Drew Brees era! There was even talk of treating the game like a preseason game and pulling the starters after the 1st Q. Embarassing!

Saints better fix their O-line or they won't be going anywhere. Brees can't do anyhting with DL's draped all over him. They need depth at OT and right now they need their backuo OT's to step up!

road kill
10-31-2011, 03:48 PM
Worse game of the Sean Payton/Drew Brees era! There was even talk of treating the game like a preseason game and pulling the starters after the 1st Q. Embarassing!

Saints better fix their O-line or they won't be going anywhere. Brees can't do anyhting with DL's draped all over him. They need depth at OT and right now they need their backuo OT's to step up!
I am pretty surprised at that game.

Maybe a wke up call??

NO is better than that.
BUT-----on any given Sunday!


RK

Franco
10-31-2011, 03:52 PM
I am pretty surprised at that game.

Maybe a wke up call??

NO is better than that.
BUT-----on any given Sunday!


RK

No excuses, they should ahve won easily.

Having the WS Champs in the house might have fired them up. Howie Long Jr of the Rams was up against our 3rd string right OT and ate his lunch. When the backup OT went down, little Howie got 3 sacks and was in Brees' face all day!

The Rams wanted it more than the Saints.

Buzz
10-31-2011, 03:59 PM
Wish they would have waited till the Detroit game before getting a wake-up call! ;-)

huntinman
10-31-2011, 04:38 PM
I'll tell you what's fishy.....gettin' whooped by St Louis!!!!

WTH??????:shock:


RK

The Aint's are what we thought they were.

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 05:36 PM
Neoconservative Fox News is all over it so, they must be againts other neoconservatives;-)

Two woman, two five-figure settlements and Cain said he isn't aware of them? hum, sounds fishy

Both woman have agreed to not talk or they will be liable for the money they were given to keep quite as well as punitive damages.

Franco, unless you have ever had to deal with a sexual harassment conplaint, you can't imagine the difficulty. Having had the responsibility for dealing with one for an organization for which I was president, let me give you just a little information. To my knowledge, the accused man was never even made aware of the details of the complaint. I was told by the lawyer to only inform him that there had been a complaint of sexual harassment filed against him and that I was putting him on administrative leave with pay until the matter was resolved. You can imagine how upset he was when I refused to inform him of the details for which he was accused. I had made a tape recording of the woman giving the details and he was never allowed to hear the recording. The end result was he resigned. To my knowledge, he was NEVER made aware of any settlement made with the woman. You have to be involved with one of them to understand the crazy hoops you have to jump through to deal with. I will also add that he may not even know the name or names of those that filed the complaint. these are just a miniscule facts for which I had to deal.

BonMallari
10-31-2011, 05:51 PM
Franco, unless you have ever had to deal with a sexual harassment conplaint, you can't imagine the difficulty. Having had the responsibility for dealing with one for an organization for which I was president, let me give you just a little information. To my knowledge, the accused man was never even made aware of the details of the complaint. I was told by the lawyer to only inform him that there had been a complaint of sexual harassment filed against him and that I was putting him on administrative leave with pay until the matter was resolved. You can imagine how upset he was when I refused to inform him of the details for which he was accused. I had made a tape recording of the woman giving the details and he was never allowed to hear the recording. The end result was he resigned. To my knowledge, he was NEVER made aware of any settlement made with the woman. You have to be involved with one of them to understand the crazy hoops you have to jump through to deal with. I will also add that he may not even know the name or names of those that filed the complaint. these are just a miniscule facts for which I had to deal.

Cary : what you described was almost verbatim what happened to us (mgmt team)..we werent made aware of any charges until we appeared in court...mine was that I made the comment ".....did you get a tip..." in response to a bartender lifting a waitress off the ground, which exposed her backside, on a night when the dress of the day was "bikers and babes theme night" hosted by a local radio station...the girls got a settlement, and the case was thrown out of court because they released all of our names to the press, which the judge specifically forbid....

Wayne Nutt
10-31-2011, 06:22 PM
I was formally accused of sexual harassment once. There was nothing to the charge. It was a young lady that wasn't doing her job and was reprimanded for it, given a poor performance appraisal and this was her response. On the eve of the hearing, her attorney called and said they didn't want to pursue the matter but wanted to negotiate terms in which she would not be discharged. She volunteered to continue with counseling, take a transfer to another department, etc. We negotiated an agreement where she would leave voluntarily, two months salary. It was worth it just to get rid of a poor performer.
As a result of this the agency changed their procedures on grievances.

It was a very trying experience. I have had age an discrimination grievence, and other complaints filed against me. All were dismissed. That is what happens when you try to clean up a poor performing group of people in a public agency and one with lots of women. We had other women that were excellant performers and we got along just fine.

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 06:27 PM
Cary : what you described was almost verbatim what happened to us (mgmt team)..we werent made aware of any charges until we appeared in court...mine was that I made the comment ".....did you get a tip..." in response to a bartender lifting a waitress off the ground, which exposed her backside, on a night when the dress of the day was "bikers and babes theme night" hosted by a local radio station...the girls got a settlement, and the case was thrown out of court because they released all of our names to the press, which the judge specifically forbid....

I was on the end trying to deal with it. You can imagine the anger he displayed when I told him that a charge of sexual harassment had been filed against him and that I was putting him on administrative leave with pay. He was to give me the keys and not set foot on the property until further notice. It being a small town, he went to the board members and accused me of trying to get him fired. Board members were calling me complaining that it was unreasonable not to inform him of the details while the lawyer threatened to quit if I did so. Thankfully it never went to court. All records other than the lawyer were kept in my possession and after a year had passed, I destroyed the tape and all written communication concerning the matter. To my knowledge, only the lawyer would have any record of it and he has passed away.

It has been my experience that women will take a comment as a complement at times if they like the man as an individual. If they don't, they take any personal comment as unwelcome and consider it as sexual harassment.

I did have a dental assistant who had the self confidence to deal with an issue she had with a patient once. He was the last patient before lunch and she asked me to leave quickly as she did the other girls so she could deal with it. Later she told me she infomed him that she knew his wife but before she informed her of his conduct,j she was going to take two bricks and put you know what between then and BANG! She never had a problem with him again. I sort of thought it was the way to handle it and thanked her for her wisdom:)

Marvin S
10-31-2011, 06:41 PM
Neither me nor my wife ever voted for Clinton. For years I could not stand the sight of him or the sound of his voice.

There may be hope for you yet :-P :) !!!

On a lighter side - it is nice to see the Lions D getting back to standard :) .

Franco
10-31-2011, 06:45 PM
Franco, unless you have ever had to deal with a sexual harassment conplaint, you can't imagine the difficulty. Having had the responsibility for dealing with one for an organization for which I was president, let me give you just a little information. To my knowledge, the accused man was never even made aware of the details of the complaint. I was told by the lawyer to only inform him that there had been a complaint of sexual harassment filed against him and that I was putting him on administrative leave with pay until the matter was resolved. You can imagine how upset he was when I refused to inform him of the details for which he was accused. I had made a tape recording of the woman giving the details and he was never allowed to hear the recording. The end result was he resigned. To my knowledge, he was NEVER made aware of any settlement made with the woman. You have to be involved with one of them to understand the crazy hoops you have to jump through to deal with. I will also add that he may not even know the name or names of those that filed the complaint. these are just a miniscule facts for which I had to deal.

Over the years, I've sat in on quite a few Sexual Harassement complaints with the HR Dept. when I'v had my people involved. We listen to the complaint and record it. Then we talk to the individual accused without naming the person complaining. We record the response and either dismiss the person or issue a warning.

Working for the biggest radio broadcaster in the USA, we never once settled a Sexual Harassement charge. As a company, we covered our ass. If not then we could have been liable. Companies or organizations are only liable when they are derilic in handling the accusation. Sometime organizations settle to avoid exposing key personel or to avoid a scandel.

Wayne Nutt
10-31-2011, 06:47 PM
Now I remember the "other" complaint. It was a sexual and racial discrimination complaint. It was a hoot because I wasn't really involved in the issues but I was the only non-minority in the chain of command. She never would accept the findings of the hearing officers and it got appealed all the way to the appropriate agency in Washington D.C. who rejected the appeal.

Boy this brings back nightmares! I am glad I am retired.

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 07:27 PM
Over the years, I've sat in on quite a few Sexual Harassement complaints with the HR Dept. when I'v had my people involved. We listen to the complaint and record it. Then we talk to the individual accused without naming the person complaining. We record the response and either dismiss the person or issue a warning.

Working for the biggest radio broadcaster in the USA, we never once settled a Sexual Harassement charge. As a company, we covered our ass. If not then we could have been liable. Companies or organizations are only liable when they are derilic in handling the accusation. Sometime organizations settle to avoid exposing key personel or to avoid a scandel.

Franco, I was the human resources and I am a dentist. The board members consisted of owners of small propriortorships, employees of small companies ect. It was a small golf club with a manager, female book keeper and janitor, along with the grounds crew. There was no employee policy, no benefits, just hourly wages. I called a board meeting sunday afternoon to discuss the problem with the board. Our first decision was to inform the woman that she could take off with pay and we would let her know when to come back to work. I called a lawyer that night to handle the problem and he had a fit when he heard what I had done. He said to call her back up and tell her to go to work as telling her not to would appear as I was taking diciplinary action against her. We thought we were being nice and protective of her but he said that could be construed otherwise. Mom and Pop businesses really don't have a chance if such a charge is filed against them. They don't have the resources or expertise to deal with something like that. Had I not had a lawyer that knew what he was doing, I would have been up a creek without a paddle.

In 35 years of practice, I never fired an employee. I always hoped they would quit. After that experience, I always felt vulnerable and tried to avoiid any conflict with an employee.

The question asked of Herman Cain, "have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?", is really uncalled for. The female I spoke of atually came to me 6 weeks before she filed the complaint and expressed to me that she "felt sexually harassed", but not to say anything to the manager. The action I took was during a discussion with the manager, I guided the conversation toward sexual harassment in a general way, hoping that if there was any substance to the accusation, he would take a hint and quit the conduct if he was actually hitting on her. It didn't work because she filed the complaint later. Like I said, it was a nightmare.

Franco
10-31-2011, 07:38 PM
Franco, I was the human resources and I am a dentist. The board members consisted of owners of small propriortorships, employees of small companies ect. It was a small golf club with a manager, female book keeper and janitor, along with the grounds crew. There was no employee policy, no benefits, just hourly wages. I called a board meeting sunday afternoon to discuss the problem with the board. Our first decision was to inform the woman that she could take off with pay and we would let her know when to come back to work. I called a lawyer that night to handle the problem and he had a fit when he heard what I had done. He said to call her back up and tell her to go to work as telling her not to would appear as I was taking diciplinary action against her. We thought we were being nice and protective of her but he said that could be construed otherwise. Mom and Pop businesses really don't have a chance if such a charge is filed against them. They don't have the resources or expertise to deal with something like that. Had I not had a lawyer that knew what he was doing, I would have been up a creek without a paddle.

In 35 years of practice, I never fired an employee. I always hoped they would quit. After that experience, I always felt vulnerable and tried to avoiid any conflict with an employee.

The question asked of Herman Cain, "have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?", is really uncalled for. The female I spoke of atually came to me 6 weeks before she filed the complaint and expressed to me that she "felt sexually harassed", but not to say anything to the manager. The action I took was during a discussion with the manager, I guided the conversation toward sexual harassment in a general way, hoping that if there was any substance to the accusation, he would take a hint and quit the conduct if he was actually hitting on her. It didn't work because she filed the complaint later. Like I said, it was a nightmare.


The obligation of a comapny or organization is to investigate and stop any inappropriate behavior. What HR wants to hear from the Defendent is "I just want it to stop". That's a clue that the complaint is legit. If the company fails to take appropriate action, then they become liable.

Settling a Sexual Harsemment is an admission of guilt. Who would want that on thier record if innocent? Settlements are done to make the complaint go a way and save the organization any embaressment or to protect a key employee's position and/or family. That's why the Defend as part of the settlement agrees to not discuss it with anyone.

I the Clinton's case, Jennifer Flowers broke her agreement to remain silent after the settlement.

luvmylabs23139
10-31-2011, 08:40 PM
The obligation of a comapny or organization is to investigate and stop any inappropriate behavior. What HR wants to hear from the Defendent is "I just want it to stop". That's a clue that the complaint is legit. If the company fails to take appropriate action, then they become liable.



While I agree with this statement I must disagree that a settlement is an admission of guilt. I have been both an HR manager and a payroll manager for several different sized companies.
Often people with BS complaints go straight to a lawyer bypassing HR.
THe lawyers take the claim because they know that it is cheaper in many cases for the company to settle quickly for a fairly small sum even if there is zero merrit to the case than pay the legal bills to fight the claim.
These sleazy lawyers make a living off of it.
THe situation with employees going after employers has gotten even worse since Clinton passed a law that almost all types of employer/ employee disputes must go to mediatation before they can go to court.
Of course some compaints get completely laughed out of mediation because the facts are so ummm obvious as to the BS of the claim that even the employee's lawyer is shocked at the true facts.

The most entertaining one:
Employee files a claim against the company claiming he was fired because of race.
The real reason he was terminated. He pulled a handgun on another employee in the parking lot at lunch time. Seems he was a bookie and the other guy owed him on a bad bet.
Police were called and he was arrested and faced numerous felony charges.
You should have seen the look on his lawyer's face when we showed them the the parking lot video at mediation. :grin:

caryalsobrook
10-31-2011, 08:46 PM
The obligation of a comapny or organization is to investigate and stop any inappropriate behavior. What HR wants to hear from the Defendent is "I just want it to stop". That's a clue that the complaint is legit. If the company fails to take appropriate action, then they become liable.

Settling a Sexual Harsemment is an admission of guilt. Who would want that on thier record if innocent? Settlements are done to make the complaint go a way and save the organization any embaressment or to protect a key employee's position and/or family. That's why the Defend as part of the settlement agrees to not discuss it with anyone.

I the Clinton's case, Jennifer Flowers broke her agreement to remain silent after the settlement.
The "appropriate action" is the fly in the ointment. What may have been deemed appropriate for previous cases may be deem inapropriate due to the circumstances of the current case. Lawyers' job is to create the impression that the current case is "unique". that is what they do to be successful.

As for a settlement being an admission of guilt, I must dissagree on many circumstances. If you serve on a board, have liability insurance and are sued, you may very well and probably do not have the right to forego a settlement if the insurance company so chooses. If you refuse to settle the insurance can be absolved of any liability.

It is never as simple as you imply. If it were, then there would be no lawsuits even in sexual harassment cases.

cripes
11-01-2011, 05:54 AM
Why don't we just call it what it is , another " high tech lynching of a conservative black man ". Where have I heard that before?

BonMallari
11-01-2011, 07:13 AM
Why don't we just call it what it is , another " high tech lynching of a conservative black man ". Where have I heard that before?


SCOTUS Clarence Thomas hearings

BonMallari
11-01-2011, 09:51 AM
so now there is speculation that another campaign released this info to the media....anyone care to speculate where it came from

road kill
11-01-2011, 09:53 AM
so now there is speculation that another campaign released this info to the media....anyone care to speculate where it came from
Romney


Just guessin'.......


RK

BonMallari
11-01-2011, 10:23 AM
Romney


Just guessin'.......


RK


Nah, I'm guessing it came from further south

luvmylabs23139
11-01-2011, 10:29 AM
My guess is Perry. If Cain goes down in the polls Perry would get most of those people not Romney. There was a poll out a few days ago that has Cain way ahead of Perry in Texas!

road kill
11-01-2011, 10:31 AM
Nah, I'm guessing it came from further south

Because of this?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/oct/31/herman-cain-tops-perry-texas/

RK

BonMallari
11-01-2011, 10:41 AM
My guess is Perry. If Cain goes down in the polls Perry would get most of those people not Romney. There was a poll out a few days ago that has Cain way ahead of Perry in Texas!


Because of this?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/oct/31/herman-cain-tops-perry-texas/

RK


where there is smoke.....and yes you have to look and see who has the most to gain...motive...

Law and Order, CSI junkie regards

Franco
11-01-2011, 11:22 AM
Here is a question for y'all;

If you were accused in your workplace of Sexual Harassment twice, would you encourage your employer to settle or stand up for yourself and fight the charges?

Remember, those charges stay on your work record if not dismissed.

BonMallari
11-01-2011, 01:18 PM
Here is a question for y'all;

If you were accused in your workplace of Sexual Harassment twice, would you encourage your employer to settle or stand up for yourself and fight the charges?

Remember, those charges stay on your work record if not dismissed.


they dont necessarily stay on your record,it may read that an investigation was done and the charges were unfounded and without merit...and from my experience, the suit is always directed at the employer (with the deepest pockets)...now if you are terminated because of the charges that's a whole nother ball game..but in today's world, you can not divulge why someone was terminated, only verify that they were employed from this date to that date...

and you bet I would fight them,part of our settlement is that we didnt countersue, which is one of the reasons they settled;)

Franco
11-01-2011, 02:13 PM
they dont necessarily stay on your record,it may read that an investigation was done and the charges were unfounded and without merit...and from my experience, the suit is always directed at the employer (with the deepest pockets)...now if you are terminated because of the charges that's a whole nother ball game..but in today's world, you can not divulge why someone was terminated, only verify that they were employed from this date to that date...

and you bet I would fight them,part of our settlement is that we didnt countersue, which is one of the reasons they settled;)

If there is a settlement or if there is an admission of guilt, it will stay on one's record. That is unless the charges have been dropped as part of the settlement. Settlements are designed to make the issue go away and protect the guilty. Personally, if ever I was charged, the last thing I would want to do is settle.

BTW, the employer can only be sued if they are found negligent in handling the complaint. Though most companies make their employees sign an agreement prior to hiring them that any action against the company be handled in arbitration, cases like Sexual Harssment do not have to be settled via Arbitration.

Hew
11-01-2011, 02:55 PM
Personally, if ever I was charged, the last thing I would want to do is settle.
I'm certainly not an attorney, but I don't believe the choice is always yours to make when someone else (like the insurance company underwriting your liability policy) is paying for your attorney or the large corporation you work for tells you you're going to settle. Or I guess you could get all principled and decide to quit your job and drain your 401k to foot the bill for your own attorney to fight it out in court.

Uncle Bill
11-01-2011, 03:27 PM
I'm certainly not an attorney, but I don't believe the choice is always yours to make when someone else (like the insurance company underwriting your liability policy) is paying for your attorney or the large corporation you work for tells you you're going to settle.


That is almost ALWAYS the case...especially for large corporations that see far more hassles in going to court and chancing 'other' discoveries. Also, what is being paid out will certainly be far less than what the total amount charged by a crowd of lathered up lawyers.

FWIW, when all this focus on sexual harrassment in the work force was getting incredible play, and at the time made any manager in business thinking those that did the hiring and firing were guilty until proven otherwise, regardless the charges.

At the time I was the Engineer in Charge of a multi-station radio operation. I just posted a sign in my department that stated, "Sexual harrassment in this department will not be reported...but it WILL be graded." Doubt it was humorous to any shyster wanting to nail my hide, but it put them on notice as to what I thought of their ludicrous regulation.

UB

Franco
11-01-2011, 03:46 PM
I'm certainly not an attorney, but I don't believe the choice is always yours to make when someone else (like the insurance company underwriting your liability policy) is paying for your attorney or the large corporation you work for tells you you're going to settle. Or I guess you could get all principled and decide to quit your job and drain your 401k to foot the bill for your own attorney to fight it out in court.

The company can only be sued if they are negligent in handling the complaint! The company or organization is not liable if they do thier job, even if the accusations are true and take appropriate action against the accused!!! Companies do settle when they want to protect a key employee or protect thier image from being scrutenized. Usually, the head of the company or organization will make the call to keep it out of the press and settle. Or, they might be informed by thier attoneys that the case against them is strong because they didn't handle the complaint properly and the best thing to do is settle. Innocent people do not settle Sexual Harassment cases!

Raymond Little
11-01-2011, 04:03 PM
I kinda like being Sexually Harrassed, makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.;)

Hew
11-01-2011, 04:27 PM
The company can only be sued if they are negligent in handling the complaint! The company or organization is not liable if they do thier job, even if the accusations are true and take appropriate action against the accused!!!
Me thinks you're in deep water here. Attorneys aren't in the habit of suing people who don't have money...they sue companies for sexual harrassment; not individuals.

Raymond Little
11-01-2011, 04:32 PM
EPL...Employment Practices Liability covers discrimination in the work place and usually covers any kind of discrimination or harrasement. Almost all policies have a consent to settle clause in them that spells out who is on the hook if the suit is not settled by the company.
Now, who needs some????:)

Franco
11-01-2011, 04:32 PM
Me thinks you're in deep water here. Attorneys aren't in the habit of suing people who don't have money...they sue companies for sexual harrassment; not individuals.

Need a little help with your reading comprehension? I said companies are only liable when they don't do thier job with the complaint!

Raymond Little
11-01-2011, 04:38 PM
Need a little help with your reading comprehension? I said companies are only liable when they don't do thier job with the complaint!

This is true But, any good ambulance chaser can find out if the company did enough due diligence prior to hiring and punch a hole in that theory. If the harrasser is a Serial Harrasser like B/C it would be easy enough to find enough information out to have precluded them from being hired in the first place. Once hired, the attorney would have enough info to hold over the companies head for them to beg to settle. Worked for one who did it over and over just to keep their image.

Hew
11-01-2011, 04:55 PM
EPL...Employment Practices Liability covers discrimination in the work place and usually covers any kind of discrimination or harrasement. Almost all policies have a consent to settle clause in them that spells out who is on the hook if the suit is not settled by the company.
Now, who needs some????:)
Wait a minute. A consent to settle clause can't be true because noted legal scholar F. Lee Franco just told us that anyone who settles does so because they're guilty. :rolleyes:

Raymond Little
11-01-2011, 04:59 PM
Wait a minute. A consent to settle clause can't be true because noted legal scholar F. Lee Franco just told us that anyone who settles does so because they're guilty. :rolleyes:

Hew, most policies stipulate that if you fight the settlement you are on the hook for legal fees and or judgement. EPL is the new gravy train in the insurance industry especially during difficult economic times.

Franco
11-01-2011, 05:01 PM
This is true But, any good ambulance chaser can find out if the company did enough due diligence prior to hiring and punch a hole in that theory. If the harrasser is a Serial Harrasser like B/C it would be easy enough to find enough information out to have precluded them from being hired in the first place. Once hired, the attorney would have enough info to hold over the companies head for them to beg to settle. Worked for one who did it over and over just to keep their image.

Since 1990, I have sat in on over a dozen Sexual Harassment cases, a couple of Racial Discrimination/Reverse Discrimination cases and a sorted few others with the HR Dept.

In the Sexual Harassment cases, if there was any indication that the accused was guilty, we dismissed them on the spot. That was a directive from our legal department at corporate HQ. If there was doubt, we talked with the victim on a daily basis to make sure it didn't continue. At no time did we ever pay a SH settlement and we were a six billion cap corporation. We did settle one Racial Discrimination claim.

Raymond Little
11-01-2011, 05:10 PM
Since 1990, I have sat in on over a dozen Sexual Harassment cases, a couple of Racial Discrimination/Reverse Discrimination cases and a sorted few others with the HR Dept.

In the Sexual Harassment cases, if there was any indication that the accused was guilty, we dismissed them on the spot. That was a directive from our legal department at corporate HQ. If there was doubt, we talked with the victim on a daily basis to make sure it didn't continue. At no time did we ever pay a SH settlement and we were a six billion cap corporation. We did settle one Racial Discrimination claim.

Probably self insured so coverage would not apply but how would one know if Chedda was spread after the fact? The one I found out about after the fact was given $50,000 per year for ten years and terminated on the ten year anniversary.

Franco
11-01-2011, 05:20 PM
Probably self insured so coverage would not apply but how would one know if Chedda was spread after the fact? The one I found out about after the fact was given $50,000 per year for ten years and terminated on the ten year anniversary.

As a publicly traded company we didn't put up with much. If the person was gulity or we had enough of a papertrail on them, they were dismissed immediatly, which didn't allow for a sleezy attorney to place his paws on us.;-)

Franco
11-01-2011, 05:59 PM
Wait a minute. A consent to settle clause can't be true because noted legal scholar F. Lee Franco just told us that anyone who settles does so because they're guilty. :rolleyes:

EPL's as Raymond stated is a new product.

Corporate made employees agree to Arbitration as a prerequsite to employment. That's standard in most of the corporate world. Again, companies are only liable via a suit or arbitration if the are negligent in handling the issue. If the accused is fired, the accusee has no recourse with the company. If the accused is not dismissed, for whatever reason, daily/weekly meetings with the accusee can prevent any further action.

I've been walked through this enough with our legal department to know I'd never want to work in an HR Dept.

Franco
11-02-2011, 09:30 AM
On the lighter side;

Herman Cain: China Indicated It's 'Trying To Develop Nuclear Capability'


During an interview (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/hermancain_10-31.html) that aired on PBS' NewsHour on Monday night, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain warned (http://shanghaiist.com/2011/11/01/gop_presidential_candidate_herman_c.php) that China has indicated it's "trying to develop nuclear capability."

Cain released a statement to clarify his position on China:

He misspoke and said "Nukes"; he meant stop China from acquiring "Dukes" as in Bo, Luke and that fine Daisy.

:o

huntinman
11-02-2011, 10:11 AM
On the lighter side;

Herman Cain: China Indicated It's 'Trying To Develop Nuclear Capability'


During an interview (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/hermancain_10-31.html) that aired on PBS' NewsHour on Monday night, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain warned (http://shanghaiist.com/2011/11/01/gop_presidential_candidate_herman_c.php) that China has indicated it's "trying to develop nuclear capability."

Cain released a statement to clarify his position on China:

He misspoke and said "Nukes"; he meant stop China from acquiring "Dukes" as in Bo, Luke and that fine Daisy.

:o

As opposed to your idol, Rue Paul who is all for Iran acquiring Nukes... Which is clearly not on the lighter side. It's just downright lunacy.

Franco
11-02-2011, 10:24 AM
As opposed to your idol, Rue Paul who is all for Iran acquiring Nukes... Which is clearly not on the lighter side. It's just downright lunacy.


Spreading lies again Huntingman? Ron Paul is not "all for Iran acquiring Nukes"!

But then again, I know you would love to see the USA at war with Iran. Typical extreme right/neoconservative view. How else are you going to stop them, invade Iran? Place sanctions on them?

Lets hear how you would stop Iran IF AND WHEN they ever devolpe anything nuclear.

huntinman
11-02-2011, 10:29 AM
Spreading lies again Huntingman? Ron Paul is not "all for Iran acquiring Nukes"!

But then again, I know you would love to see the USA at war with Iran. How else are you going to stop them, invade Iran? Place sanctions on them?

Lets hear how you would stop Iran IF AND WHEN they ever devolpe anything nuclear.

I would threaten to play non stop recordings of Ron Paul speeches on loud speakers 24 hours a day in Tehran till they relented... begging for mercy.;-)

Franco
11-02-2011, 10:33 AM
I would threaten to play non stop recordings of Ron Paul speeches on loud speakers 24 hours a day in Tehran till they relented... begging for mercy.;-)

I figured you couldn't answer the question!

I view anyone advocating war with Iran to be dangerous.;-)

road kill
11-02-2011, 05:33 PM
Not good, but something stinks here!

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2011/11/02/third-former-cain-employee-claims-she-was-harassed-by-gop-candidate/


RK

Hew
11-02-2011, 05:49 PM
Cain should hire the esteemed and surely unbiased George Stephanopolis away from his lofty journalistic perch at ABC (you know, the news org that is so much fairer than Fox) to reprise his role as Chief Bimbo Eruption Eradicator. He did such a great job discrediting women on behalf of Clinton.

huntinman
11-02-2011, 10:47 PM
I figured you couldn't answer the question!

I view anyone advocating war with Iran to be dangerous.;-)

Your view is a little cloudy from all the smoke in the crowd that follows RP.

As for Iran... I think Israel will not be able to wait on us to make a decision. They will take matters into their own hands and clean that situation up.

Franco
11-03-2011, 07:13 AM
Your view is a little cloudy from all the smoke in the crowd that follows RP.

As for Iran... I think Israel will not be able to wait on us to make a decision. They will take matters into their own hands and clean that situation up.

Tell me something I don't already know! Besides, being all over the press the last two days having Israel handle their own situation is what Ron Paul has been advocating all along.

But, you are dodging the question. You have been critical of RP's stance of what the USA should do about it. Going in and hitting their nuke plant won't end but will escalate hostilities with Iran. So, are you advocating that the USA get involved or do you agree with RP that this is not our fight?

road kill
11-03-2011, 07:18 AM
Tell me something I don't already know! Besides, being all over the press the last two days having Israel handle their own situation is what Ron Paul has been advocating all along.

But, you are dodging the question. You have been critical of RP's stance of what the USA should do about it. Going in and hitting their nuke plant won't end but will escalate hostilities with Iran. So, are you advocating that the USA get involved or do you agree with RP that this is not our fight?

Frankly, we should let Israel deal with it and back them.



RK

Franco
11-03-2011, 09:10 AM
Frankly, we should let Israel deal with it and back them.



RK

I couldn't agree more!;-)

I've also written the same here on RTF recently. Part of our failed Foreign Policy of Intervetion "world police' is that we have prolonged the inevitable only making any coming comfrontation much worse than had the issue been settled back when.

Israel is in peril because of our policy. Had we not restrained them in the early 70's they would have expanded their boarders making it easier to defend themselves. They took out both Iraq's and Syria's nuclear ambitions on their own and would have done so to Iran had we not refrained them.

Now, with the Muslim world's opinion that we have declared war on Islam, any attack on Iran would rally not only Pakistan but possibly Turkey to join the fight.