Folks, this woman has a legitimate claim. If you don\’t believe me, go to your internal HR department with this article and explain to them that you believe the woman suing is wrong. My guess is they\’ll enroll you in some \”sensitivity training\” real darn quick.
The legal term is \”hostile work environment\” – if the employer creates a hostile work environment, members of a protected class (everyone except single straight white men under 40) can sue under Title 7. The classic case is where a woman working in a auto garage sued because the guys put up centerfolds all over the place. She won. So, what do you think the result will be in the current case, involving physical contact with sexual connotations? Don\’t bet against this one.
Several of you wrote about how this was \”voluntary.\” Well, according to the law, and common sense, you\’re wrong: any such public setting pretty much ensures that participation really isn\’t \”voluntary\” – everyone knows that failure to participate will have consequences.
This is an important issue. The work place is changing, with all sorts of new participants. People seem unable to realize that the work setting is NOT A SOCIAL SETTING – different rules apply. Work is hard enough that people shouldn\’t have to be put through experiences they find humiliating or shameful. And just like beauty, humuliation and shame are in the eye of the beholder. If you\’re unable to consider how others might respond to your actions and act considerately, you\’re a walking discrimination timebomb. Like the jackass who thought up this \”team building\” exercise.
I am sure this woman has also filed a workers\’ comp claim of which she probably remains off of work for a psychiatric injury and collecting over $3000 a month in disability benefits. I am not sure when the injury occurred, but most likely she can milk the disability for 5 years.
More than likely, she filed a work comp claim first and her money-hungry attorney told her that she could end up with more money in her, \”his\”, pocket if they sued under EPL. I seriously doubt that this woman walked into her attorney’s office and said, I want to file an EPL claim.
Ever since the CA work comp reform of 2004 signed by our very famous governor, work comp attorneys have been losing money because the cases aren\’t worth what they used to be. There is a growing trend in CA that attorneys are now pursuing employment practices cases to protect and increase their revenue. If you don’t believe me, look it up.
From my perspective, it is never about the injured employee, but always about the next new car, vacation, house, you name it…that the attorney wants to own.
Why wasn\’t it a hostile work environment until her team lost and she had to face the \”consequences\” of losing????
It sounds like this competition between teams had been going on for some time, so I am assuming that she knew about the \”consequences\” for losing and probably witnessed them a time or two.
It can be a hostile work environment even when the \”hostilities\” are not directed at you personally. So,if it was a hostile work environment, like she is claiming, she should have sued when she first found out about &/or witnessed the \”consequences\”.
Sensitivity training..I do handle our HR department. We will not go down the PC road. Just cause she might win does not make her right!!! Women say they can do anything a guy can do(leftists women). Yet the entire business world has had to change to incorporate women and make them comfortable. Nursing rooms, day care rooms, sensitivity training, one sided laws, etc. I am not against women who choose to work or have to work. Just apply some common sense! If a female goes to work in a male dominated profession, like auto repair, do all the men have to change to make her feel comfortable or should she accept what is already there. I honestly think hanging up pictures of scantily clad or nude women is totally degrading period. I wont go to work where that is hanging around.
We have many God given rights in this great country, but the right to never be offended does not exist!!!!!!!!
This was not a hostile work environment it was a group activity for fun. She was offended- grow up or quit!!!!!!!!!
It was a hostile work environment for as long as a reasonable person could (not \”would\”) find it to be so. And a jury will decide what a reasonable person would feel in that situation. Maybe she was quaking in her shoes at the thought of losing and getting spanked every day, but it was the actual experience that pushed her over the edge and prompted her to sue.
I\’m saddened that so many people are jumping to defend this company and their inane program. If instead of a spanking, the penalty was to strip naked and run around the office, would you deny someone\’s claim just because it was supposedly \”voluntary\” and that \”everyone else participated\”?
I\’m a lawyer (not practicing though) and also a HUGE believer that many members of the plaintiff\’s bar are nothing more than leeches on society. I think Dicky Scruggs is pure, distilled evil. Even with that strong bias against frivolous lawsuits, I still think this one has some merit.
People need to realize that others in their work environment may be more sensitive to some things than they temselves are, and seek to understand this and avoid offensive actions. It\’s called \”compassion\” and it\’s a good thing.
So, people with sensitivities that are different than yours should have fewer opportunites for satisfying employment? That\’s interesting.
And I like this quote:
\”Yet the entire business world has had to change to incorporate women and make them comfortable\”
Sooo…instead we men should be able to carry on however we like and make women uncomfotable? Why is our comfort more important than their comfort? Shouldn\’t we ALL be able to be comfotable in our work environment?
You\’re right about the freedom thing. And in a social, truly voluntary setting, I\’d be right there with you decrying this woman\’s actions. But surely you agree that work is a different situation. This is not about a right not to be offended, this is about a right to have the same opportunities for gainful, enjoyable employment regardless of age, race, sex, etc..
Welcome to the 2000\’s, MUD, sounds like you\’re in for a rough trip.
Not one of these posts supported the company, not one! They all said it was stupid. What most posts are saying is that the lady had numerous outs!!! I don\’t think many folks would volunteer for running around nude. Im sorry… they do when they work for Playboy and the porn industry-yet it is not considered a hostile environment- How can that be. no one has to be naked with Hef, it\’s voluntary, unless you want to become a centerfold- now that is stressful stuff, you can\’t move up the porn ladder unless you perform at ever more disgusting levels! Now there is an example of using force to get women to do something they really dont want to do all in the name of getting ahead.
A little spanking never hurt anyone, unless it was done at work. These antics are better left for home. What were sales managers thinking? This is not the 1960\’s!
Actually I do not agree with you. I never even hinted at behaving like an idiot, all my posts(please actually read them before commenting) condemned such acts of stupidity. I believe being a gentlemen at home, in public, and at work is a must. No sensitivity training will make that happen. Sensitivity training is all about pushing the homosexual agenda and other leftists agendas!!!!!!!!!!
The majority should not have to change to please a minority. But in the twisted world of leftists, that makes sense to them. Lets be honest, this company is not the norm. Successful companies typically operate under common sense. I do not nor ever will support an unprofessional work place, but the facts are facts. The business world had to change to incorporate a few leftists women. We all had to pay the costs of daycare. There is a tax credit for day care, yet my wife stays home with our girls-which is a very important thing-actually raising your own children, and not pawning that responsibility off on others. But Uncle Sam\’s tax code discourages this good behavior by rewarding only those women who put children in day care. They get money back in reduced taxes. Sensitivity training never happened before, now there are people actually earning salaries for this. More costs to business which are passed on to all consumers.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Folks, this woman has a legitimate claim. If you don\’t believe me, go to your internal HR department with this article and explain to them that you believe the woman suing is wrong. My guess is they\’ll enroll you in some \”sensitivity training\” real darn quick.
The legal term is \”hostile work environment\” – if the employer creates a hostile work environment, members of a protected class (everyone except single straight white men under 40) can sue under Title 7. The classic case is where a woman working in a auto garage sued because the guys put up centerfolds all over the place. She won. So, what do you think the result will be in the current case, involving physical contact with sexual connotations? Don\’t bet against this one.
Several of you wrote about how this was \”voluntary.\” Well, according to the law, and common sense, you\’re wrong: any such public setting pretty much ensures that participation really isn\’t \”voluntary\” – everyone knows that failure to participate will have consequences.
This is an important issue. The work place is changing, with all sorts of new participants. People seem unable to realize that the work setting is NOT A SOCIAL SETTING – different rules apply. Work is hard enough that people shouldn\’t have to be put through experiences they find humiliating or shameful. And just like beauty, humuliation and shame are in the eye of the beholder. If you\’re unable to consider how others might respond to your actions and act considerately, you\’re a walking discrimination timebomb. Like the jackass who thought up this \”team building\” exercise.
I am sure this woman has also filed a workers\’ comp claim of which she probably remains off of work for a psychiatric injury and collecting over $3000 a month in disability benefits. I am not sure when the injury occurred, but most likely she can milk the disability for 5 years.
More than likely, she filed a work comp claim first and her money-hungry attorney told her that she could end up with more money in her, \”his\”, pocket if they sued under EPL. I seriously doubt that this woman walked into her attorney’s office and said, I want to file an EPL claim.
Ever since the CA work comp reform of 2004 signed by our very famous governor, work comp attorneys have been losing money because the cases aren\’t worth what they used to be. There is a growing trend in CA that attorneys are now pursuing employment practices cases to protect and increase their revenue. If you don’t believe me, look it up.
From my perspective, it is never about the injured employee, but always about the next new car, vacation, house, you name it…that the attorney wants to own.
Why wasn\’t it a hostile work environment until her team lost and she had to face the \”consequences\” of losing????
It sounds like this competition between teams had been going on for some time, so I am assuming that she knew about the \”consequences\” for losing and probably witnessed them a time or two.
It can be a hostile work environment even when the \”hostilities\” are not directed at you personally. So,if it was a hostile work environment, like she is claiming, she should have sued when she first found out about &/or witnessed the \”consequences\”.
Sensitivity training..I do handle our HR department. We will not go down the PC road. Just cause she might win does not make her right!!! Women say they can do anything a guy can do(leftists women). Yet the entire business world has had to change to incorporate women and make them comfortable. Nursing rooms, day care rooms, sensitivity training, one sided laws, etc. I am not against women who choose to work or have to work. Just apply some common sense! If a female goes to work in a male dominated profession, like auto repair, do all the men have to change to make her feel comfortable or should she accept what is already there. I honestly think hanging up pictures of scantily clad or nude women is totally degrading period. I wont go to work where that is hanging around.
We have many God given rights in this great country, but the right to never be offended does not exist!!!!!!!!
This was not a hostile work environment it was a group activity for fun. She was offended- grow up or quit!!!!!!!!!
Hi Just –
It was a hostile work environment for as long as a reasonable person could (not \”would\”) find it to be so. And a jury will decide what a reasonable person would feel in that situation. Maybe she was quaking in her shoes at the thought of losing and getting spanked every day, but it was the actual experience that pushed her over the edge and prompted her to sue.
I\’m saddened that so many people are jumping to defend this company and their inane program. If instead of a spanking, the penalty was to strip naked and run around the office, would you deny someone\’s claim just because it was supposedly \”voluntary\” and that \”everyone else participated\”?
I\’m a lawyer (not practicing though) and also a HUGE believer that many members of the plaintiff\’s bar are nothing more than leeches on society. I think Dicky Scruggs is pure, distilled evil. Even with that strong bias against frivolous lawsuits, I still think this one has some merit.
People need to realize that others in their work environment may be more sensitive to some things than they temselves are, and seek to understand this and avoid offensive actions. It\’s called \”compassion\” and it\’s a good thing.
Hi MUD –
So, people with sensitivities that are different than yours should have fewer opportunites for satisfying employment? That\’s interesting.
And I like this quote:
\”Yet the entire business world has had to change to incorporate women and make them comfortable\”
Sooo…instead we men should be able to carry on however we like and make women uncomfotable? Why is our comfort more important than their comfort? Shouldn\’t we ALL be able to be comfotable in our work environment?
You\’re right about the freedom thing. And in a social, truly voluntary setting, I\’d be right there with you decrying this woman\’s actions. But surely you agree that work is a different situation. This is not about a right not to be offended, this is about a right to have the same opportunities for gainful, enjoyable employment regardless of age, race, sex, etc..
Welcome to the 2000\’s, MUD, sounds like you\’re in for a rough trip.
Not one of these posts supported the company, not one! They all said it was stupid. What most posts are saying is that the lady had numerous outs!!! I don\’t think many folks would volunteer for running around nude. Im sorry… they do when they work for Playboy and the porn industry-yet it is not considered a hostile environment- How can that be. no one has to be naked with Hef, it\’s voluntary, unless you want to become a centerfold- now that is stressful stuff, you can\’t move up the porn ladder unless you perform at ever more disgusting levels! Now there is an example of using force to get women to do something they really dont want to do all in the name of getting ahead.
A little spanking never hurt anyone, unless it was done at work. These antics are better left for home. What were sales managers thinking? This is not the 1960\’s!
Cry me a river! Every women I know in their 50\’s enjoys a good spanking from time to time. Can\’t say I\’m any different.
People need to quit taking themselves so damm seriously. Lighten up. Then we need to kill all the attorneys!
Actually I do not agree with you. I never even hinted at behaving like an idiot, all my posts(please actually read them before commenting) condemned such acts of stupidity. I believe being a gentlemen at home, in public, and at work is a must. No sensitivity training will make that happen. Sensitivity training is all about pushing the homosexual agenda and other leftists agendas!!!!!!!!!!
The majority should not have to change to please a minority. But in the twisted world of leftists, that makes sense to them. Lets be honest, this company is not the norm. Successful companies typically operate under common sense. I do not nor ever will support an unprofessional work place, but the facts are facts. The business world had to change to incorporate a few leftists women. We all had to pay the costs of daycare. There is a tax credit for day care, yet my wife stays home with our girls-which is a very important thing-actually raising your own children, and not pawning that responsibility off on others. But Uncle Sam\’s tax code discourages this good behavior by rewarding only those women who put children in day care. They get money back in reduced taxes. Sensitivity training never happened before, now there are people actually earning salaries for this. More costs to business which are passed on to all consumers.