« When in France, Do As the French Do…and When Not in France, Still Do As the French? | Main | More than a Home for the Holidays »

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Executives, Golden Parachutes & #MeToo - great op ed by Professor Rachel Arnow-Richman

 My terrific friend and collaborator Rachel Arnow-Richman (Denver Law) has an op-ed today in the San Francisco Chronicle about CBS's ousted CEO Moonves and the contractual obligations of corporation toward their highest executives in the case of firing for cause, in the midst of severe sexual harassment allegations:

If #MeToo is to have lasting impact, companies must consistently take a hard line against high-level harassment, not just when it aligns with their other interests. This means abandoning contracts that insulate executives from accountability in favor of those that preserve employers’ ability to respond swiftly and nimbly to alleged violations of law. 

Posted by Orly Lobel on September 18, 2018 at 09:07 PM | Permalink

Comments

Orly , you may find great interest I guess , in that post :

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/human_rights/2018/09/metoo-and-kavanaugh.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HumanRightsAtHome+%28Human+Rights+at+Home+Blog%29

Posted by: El roam | Sep 19, 2018 9:36:20 AM


Just to illustrate it :

The Israeli law , is one of the utmost progressive one , concerning the protection of women from sexual harassments , especially in the workplace. So here some , I quote from the :

Prevention of Sexual Harassment Law 5758-1998

Here the duty of one employer :

7. (a) An employer must take steps that are reasonable under the circumstances, in order to prevent sexual harassment and persecution within the realm of labour relations by his employee or by a person who has been put in charge on his behalf, even if he is not his employee, and to that end he shall -

(1) provide an effective method for the submission of complaints of sexual harassment or persecution and for the investigation of such complaints.

(2) take effective action in cases of sexual harassment or persecution of which he is aware and do all that he can to prevent a repetition of the aforesaid acts and to make good any harm caused to the complainant as a result of such sexual harassment or persecution;

While :

8. Where an employer fails to make public a set of rules as provided in Section 7(b), he shall be liable to a fine and to an additional fine for each week in which the offence continues, of the amount prescribed in Section 61(c) of the Penal Law.

And what is , among others , or how is defined the " Sexual harassment " here :

3. (a) Sexual harassment is any one of the following acts:

(4) repeated references addressed to a person and focused on his sexuality, when that person has demonstrated to the harasser that he is not interested in the said references;

(5) an insulting or debasing reference to a person in connection with his gender or sexuality, including his sexual preference;

End of quotation :

This should be rather (more or less ) the new consensus . Nothing bars , big corporations , to stipulate it , in their " shark contracts " . Surly , it is reconciled , with public interest policies .

To the law mentioned :

http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/State/Law/Pages/Prevention_of_Sexual_Harassment_Law_5758-1998.aspx

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Sep 19, 2018 8:07:09 AM

Good , Interesting and important related article . Yet , not enough , even far from it . Just some :

First , the respectable author of the related article , claims that :

" Employers routinely tie executive compensation to financial benchmarks like stock performance. They can similarly reward executives for demonstrated success in improving equal opportunity for women. Bonuses can be linked to such measures as retention and promotion rates, gender pay equity, or reductions in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filings."

End of quotation :

This can cause more harm than benefit . For , every failure of any corporation ( especially those big ) would be swiftly attributed to women , not suitable for such positions by nature . Such corrective or positive discrimination , is good for lower positions , or , basic treatments , not when dealing with executives in such level or ranks . Women , don't fall in no way , they are even far greater better , but , they need to prove themselves , in the ordinary manner , not through such policy of corrective or positive discrimination .

Second : The author of the article , claims that :

Moonves maintains that all of the alleged conduct is either fabricated or consensual.

End of quotation :

We shall leave aside right now , the so called " fabricated " for it has Universal meaning apparently . But rather concentrate upon that " consensual " one. He has a point !! I hate to write it . The consensus is horrific . Yet it is what it is . Not only the lawmaker should do something about such consensus , but in such contracts , it should be inserted and corrected. No more consensus of such ! Doesn't exist here in that corporation . New stipulations , new rules , game changers . No more even jokes in the presence of women . Keep your mouth shut . Restrain your instincts . Unless , you are definitely sure , that you and the woman you face , ride or broadcast on the same wave .But , think twice , then , shoot .

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Sep 19, 2018 7:41:11 AM

Post a comment