Hostile Work Environment

[Contumacious]

David Letterman former writer Nell Scovell complains that he never made a pass at her.

HUH?

Do you blame David?

How many guys can sustain an erection looking at a face like that?!?!?!?!?!? But David did not fuck her so he is a bad guy. Bullshit.

.

 

[Contumacious]

The Sad Evolution of Sexual Harassment

by Wendy McElroy


A $60 million lawsuit filed against FOX News and Bill O'Reilly guarantees that the topic of sexual harassment will be batted around by media. The complaint hinges on alleged "phone sex" between O'Reilly and his former associate producer Andrea Mackris. Of the many awkward questions raised by the accusations, one looms large. Even assuming tasteless remarks occurred, how could anyone demand $60 million dollars for conversations on which they could have hung up?

.

 

[JD_2B]

Scovell said she was well aware that Letterman and other "high-level male employees" were rumored to have sexual relationships with female staff members, whom she believed benefited professionally from their office affairs. Needless to say, the work environment was rife with tension.

"Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles? Yes," Scovell wrote. "Did that create a hostile work environment? Yes. Did that make me feel demeaned? Completely. Did I say anything at the time? Sadly, no."

Although Letterman never made a pass at her, Scovell said that the host did show enough "extra attention" that it was noticed by another writer.

You are such an idiot, Cont..

Moving right along..

 

[JD_2B]

The Sad Evolution of Sexual Harassment

by Wendy McElroy


A $60 million lawsuit filed against FOX News and Bill O'Reilly guarantees that the topic of sexual harassment will be batted around by media. The complaint hinges on alleged "phone sex" between O'Reilly and his former associate producer Andrea Mackris. Of the many awkward questions raised by the accusations, one looms large. Even assuming tasteless remarks occurred, how could anyone demand $60 million dollars for conversations on which they could have hung up?

.

"A hostile work environment exists when co-workers or employers engage in unwanted sexual behavior, including comments, which seriously impair an employee's job performance and comfort. This legal concept increased an employer's liability and diminished a complainant's burden of proof. Suits that would have been tossed out of court prior to Meritor now had legal merit."

But since this woman never made an administrative complaint within the company, her suit might get dropped..

 

[KittenKoder]

Cont ... just when I thought you have hit bottom ... you manage to somehow find a new layer.

 

[Contumacious]

Scovell said she was well aware that Letterman and other "high-level male employees" were rumored to have sexual relationships with female staff members, whom she believed benefited professionally from their office affairs. Needless to say, the work environment was rife with tension.

"Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles? Yes," Scovell wrote. "Did that create a hostile work environment? Yes. Did that make me feel demeaned? Completely. Did I say anything at the time? Sadly, no."

Although Letterman never made a pass at her, Scovell said that the host did show enough "extra attention" that it was noticed by another writer.

You are such an idiot, Cont..

Moving right along..

Why? Because I haven't made a pass at you?

Sorry, but you must look like Jessica Biel.

I haven't hit bottom yet ... I managed to find a new layer.

 

[Contumacious]

Cont ... just when I thought you have hit bottom ... you manage to somehow find a new layer.

My comments are intended to be bunker busters. That is where you find the basis for welfare/warfare state regulations.

The "Hostile Work Environment" is a legal fiction concocted by federal bureaucrats in order to have a pretext to invade the work place. It is NOT any of their business what the fuck happens at the XYZ Company.

After working there for a few months almost 20 years ago, now Ms Scovell feels that is the time to cash in because of her 'ordeal' working there.

.

 

[KittenKoder]

Cont ... just when I thought you have hit bottom ... you manage to somehow find a new layer.

My comments are intended to be bunker busters. That is where you find the basis for welfare/warfare state regulations.

The "Hostile Work Environment" is a legal fiction concocted by federal bureaucrats in order to have a pretext to invade the work place. It is NOT any of their business what the fuck happens at the XYZ Company.

After working there for a few months almost 20 years ago, now Ms Scovell feels that is the time to cash in because of her 'ordeal' working there.

.

Let me guess ... you never learned how to debate. That's not a "bunker buster" ... that was just vulgar and insulting for the sake of being an asshat.

 

[Contumacious]

Cont ... just when I thought you have hit bottom ... you manage to somehow find a new layer.

My comments are intended to be bunker busters. That is where you find the basis for welfare/warfare state regulations.

The "Hostile Work Environment" is a legal fiction concocted by federal bureaucrats in order to have a pretext to invade the work place. It is NOT any of their business what the fuck happens at the XYZ Company.

After working there for a few months almost 20 years ago, now Ms Scovell feels that is the time to cash in because of her 'ordeal' working there.

.

Let me guess ... you never learned how to debate. That's not a "bunker buster" ... that was just vulgar and insulting for the sake of being an asshat.

I see, so you are stating that she has the right to smear Letterman with impunity!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[KittenKoder]

My comments are intended to be bunker busters. That is where you find the basis for welfare/warfare state regulations.

The "Hostile Work Environment" is a legal fiction concocted by federal bureaucrats in order to have a pretext to invade the work place. It is NOT any of their business what the fuck happens at the XYZ Company.

After working there for a few months almost 20 years ago, now Ms Scovell feels that is the time to cash in because of her 'ordeal' working there.

.

Let me guess ... you never learned how to debate. That's not a "bunker buster" ... that was just vulgar and insulting for the sake of being an asshat.

I see, so you are stating that she has the right to smear Letterman with impunity!?!?!?!?!?

.

Now you are just plain assuming.

 

[Contumacious]

Let me guess ... you never learned how to debate. That's not a "bunker buster" ... that was just vulgar and insulting for the sake of being an asshat.

I see, so you are stating that she has the right to smear Letterman with impunity!?!?!?!?!?

.

Now you are just plain assuming.

The stupid "law" places employers in a predicament, if they alleged that they were sexually harassed they are liable; if they alleged that they were not harassed they are liable. A fucking catch 22.

Then they wonder why many employers choose to relocate overseas.

.

 

[KittenKoder]

I see, so you are stating that she has the right to smear Letterman with impunity!?!?!?!?!?

.

Now you are just plain assuming.

The stupid "law" places employers in a predicament, if they alleged that they were sexually harassed they are liable; if they alleged that they were not harassed they are liable. A fucking catch 22.

Then they wonder why many employers choose to relocate overseas.

.

How is it a "catch 22" ... I am guessing you have no idea what that even means.

You are wrong though, it doesn't put them in a predicament, sex does not belong in the work place, and if all an employer is doing is trying to "hook up" then they shouldn't have a job in the first place. However ... there does need to be a check to it as well, something to balance out the employer-employee relationships so that neither side has the edge in such a case ... which oddly, they do have such a balance, it's called the court.

 

[Contumacious]

Now you are just plain assuming.

The stupid "law" places employers in a predicament, if they alleged that they were sexually harassed they are liable; if they alleged that they were not harassed they are liable. A fucking catch 22.

Then they wonder why many employers choose to relocate overseas.

.

How is it a "catch 22" ...

I am guessing you have no idea what that even means. The phrase "Catch-22" is common idiomatic usage meaning "a no-win situation" or "a double bind" of any type.


The employer has to defend himself in federal court which requires millions of dollars , time and disruption.

The work site does not belong to you, the femi-nazis nor to the fascist regulators.

What happens in the workplace stays in the workplace.

.

 

[KittenKoder]

The stupid "law" places employers in a predicament, if they alleged that they were sexually harassed they are liable; if they alleged that they were not harassed they are liable. A fucking catch 22.

Then they wonder why many employers choose to relocate overseas.

.

How is it a "catch 22" ...

I am guessing you have no idea what that even means. The phrase "Catch-22" is common idiomatic usage meaning "a no-win situation" or "a double bind" of any type.


The employer has to defend himself in federal court which requires millions of dollars , time and disruption.

The work site does not belong to you, the femi-nazis nor to the fascist regulators.

What happens in the workplace stays in the workplace.

.

The law does not create a no win situation in any way. What happens in the workplace effects all who work there, so no, it does not "stay in the workplace" ... ever. Spin all you want, sexual harassment laws protect men just as much as it does women, it also offers the employer more protection as they must show proof of it now, prior to the laws the worker could instead have their bosses tossed in jail for rape with just a fluid sample, with the laws there is recourse for the employer as well as protection for the boss from wrongful accusations. I am guessing that you do not understand those laws well at all, you also have done nothing more than make assumptions. So if you don't get it after this post, it sucks to be you.

 

[Contumacious]

How is it a "catch 22" ...

I am guessing you have no idea what that even means. The phrase "Catch-22" is common idiomatic usage meaning "a no-win situation" or "a double bind" of any type.


The employer has to defend himself in federal court which requires millions of dollars , time and disruption.

The work site does not belong to you, the femi-nazis nor to the fascist regulators.

What happens in the workplace stays in the workplace.

.

The law does not create a no win situation in any way. What happens in the workplace effects all who work there, so no, it does not "stay in the workplace" ... ever.

I understand that welfare/warfare state tenets demand that the workplace be nationalized. Now individuals have a right to be employed by ABC and ABC is required to provide employment. Some dumb ass bureaucrat who does not know his ass from a hole in the ground can be elected to power and subsequently become , by fiat, a corporate manager. That is bullshit. Companies ought to relocate overseas and avoid such tyrannical abuse of power.If you don't get it after this post, it sucks to be you.


.

 

[JD_2B]

I see, so you are stating that she has the right to smear Letterman with impunity!?!?!?!?!?

.

Now you are just plain assuming.

The stupid "law" places employers in a predicament, if they alleged that they were sexually harassed they are liable; if they alleged that they were not harassed they are liable. A fucking catch 22.

Then they wonder why many employers choose to relocate overseas.

.

Oh for Christ sakes.. she was not alleging that she was not harassed, moron.

 

[Kat]

David Letterman former writer Nell Scovell complains that he never made a pass at her.

HUH?

Do you blame David?

How many guys can sustain an erection looking at a face like that?!?!?!?!?!? But David did not fuck her so he is a bad guy. Bullshit.

.

Cont. You are so quick to judge, so quick to be critical of what someone looks like.

Challenge.
Post your picture. Let us see what you look like. I would like to see if you are sooooo goodlookin' you have the right to be that judgemental.

 

[JW Frogen]

Personally, I think she is sexy.

I would fuck her.

And then we could write together in the morning.

Letterman is an idiot, a lucky idiot.

 

[Diuretic]

I reckon she'd be a hoot! I like intelligent women like her - bloody sad I'm not much to look at, but I am kind to animals!

Anyway this is what caught my eye:

She admits it won't happen overnight, but Scovell still holds on to her dream. "One day," Scovell said, "a late-night writer's room will be filled with poop jokes and fart jokes ... and everyone will laugh, including men and women of all creeds and colors."

A call to equality in tastless jokes! Now what's wrong with that? Okay it hasn't got the poetry of Dr King but I think I see her point

 

[Contumacious]

David Letterman former writer Nell Scovell complains that he never made a pass at her.

HUH?

Do you blame David?

How many guys can sustain an erection looking at a face like that?!?!?!?!?!? But David did not fuck her so he is a bad guy. Bullshit.

.

Cont. You are so quick to judge, so quick to be critical of what someone looks like.

Challenge.
Post your picture. Let us see what you look like. I would like to see if you are sooooo goodlookin' you have the right to be that judgemental.

.