Comments on: Implausible defense department

By: Dov Charney, the sequel

Dov Charney, the sequel — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:53:32 +0000

[…] Earlier this year Ted wrote an item titled “Implausible defense department” about American Apparel founder Dov Charney’s efforts to explain away jaw-droppingly colorful facts in the latest of the multiple sexual harassment complaints he has faced. The sequel is worthy of what has gone before: it appears that Charney faked an agreement to send the case to arbitration to conceal a deal in which he agreed to settle the claim for $1.3 million. The deal later fell apart and the case is headed back for (presumably genuine) litigation. (On Point News, Workplace Prof Blog). […]

By: sick of abusive behavior

sick of abusive behavior — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:37:32 +0000

To sick of these stupid lawsuits: so public flashing by sketchy trenchcoat-wearing perverts should not be a crime? I mean, how are those people harmed?

Check out the allegations:

Nelson, 36, who worked for American Apparel for a little more than a year, claims Charney also referred to women as “whores” and “sluts” and invited her to masturbate in front of him. Nelson’s suit alleges she was fired the day she consulted a lawyer.

You are saying that isn’t hostile? You do realize that “hostile” does not only mean behavior that goes on in POW camps, right?

By: MKM

MKM — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:07:55 +0000

To Gino: I think what’s relevant here is whether a reasonable person would consider this sexual harassment. The fact that Charney considers his behavior reasonable is irrelevant.

By: Gino

Gino — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:31:51 +0000

I saw this guy on some news show like 60 Minutes or 20/20. He’s a wild and crazy guy alright. Neither what he’s accused of, nor his defense, seem out-of-character to me. When he says he was in his underwear a lot because he was proud of it, I believe it. The interesting issue is, is outrageous behavior per se harassment? What about people who are just outrageous characters? Can we consider that what might be done by one person is actionable harassment, while the same thing done by another person is just colorful behavior?

By: sick of these stupid lawsuits

sick of these stupid lawsuits — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:53:20 +0000

I can’t take anymore of these abusive lawsuits. How was she hurt because her boss was in his underwear? Or because he wore a sock? She should be glad she had a job. She probably only took the job so she could file a lawsuit. She should be thrown out of court and made to pay Mr. Charney’s legal fees, which I am sure are excessive.

By: Anonymous Attorney

Anonymous Attorney — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:21:16 +0000

The Red Hot Chili Peppers should sue. The sock garment referenced, I believe, first appeared on on the members of the band as they posed for an album cover in the 90’s.