JURY AWARDS FEMALE LAPD OFFICER $1 MILLION FOR SEX HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK PLACE (MORE TO COME?)
I haven't seen this story elsewhere. Possible ZD exclusive. Way worse than some dog food. I tried telling Steve Hymon of LAzy Times, yesterday...but he was busy walking out the door, and didn't have time, so I posted it for his editor to read:
A U.S. District Court (Federal) jury awarded a former female LAPD officer $1 million for far worse treatment than a little dog food someone may, or may not have even taken a bite out of.
CM Parks was a witness for the Defendants and Earl Paysinger was a witness for the Plaintiff. (Parks was Chief at the time. Suit was filed in 1999.)
Basically, Plaintiffs (three female officers; one awarded the million, one ruling for Defense, and one settelment in '05 for $25,000 to the third Plaintiff) claim hostile work environment on the basis of their sex. They complained formally and informally and suffered retaliation including being subject to derogatory comments made by male co-workers.
Complaining Plaintiffs were re-assigned to Valley Traffic Division. They suffered more sex discriminatory environment, open hostility to women as officers in LAPD, a barrage of inappropriate remarks while in roll call and while working, false rumors and retaliation for complaining about harassment.
Evidence includes: metal key ring, Polish sex quiz, Bobbit (is that a “bobble head”) of Beverly Hillbillies and a “Learning to Spell” (book or program).
1) Sexually explicit materials left in station house.
2) Sexually explicit objects passed around in station house.
3) Picture of banana and apples “sexually arranged”.
4) Economics report of loss for plaintiff.
The City plans of filing a motion for a new trial, most likely to be denied by the judge, then the City will appeal, if new trial is denied.
THE STORY HERE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS TYPE OF TREATMENT. AND HOW THE CITY OF LA DOESN'T TAKE THIS STUFF SERIOUSLY. I THINK THE TAXPAYERS WHO KEEP PAYING THESE SETTELMENTS AND AWARDS CARE, THOUGH. How many of these settlements DON'T we find out about. How much more money is LA City's "Animal House" behavior going to be costing taxpayers in the future?
***** UPDATE: COMING SOON TO A FEDERAL JURY TRIAL NEAR YOU: GERAGOS & GERAGOS FILE FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST LAPD FOR KEEPING MAN LOCKED UP FOR TWO MONTHS WHILE FAILING TO PROCESS THE EXCULPATORY DNA THAT SET HIM FREE. Read Story Here *****
CONTACT: Zuma Dogg (310) 928-7544; zumadogg@netzero.com.
MORE LA CITY COVERAGE AT www.zumadogg.blogspot.com
A U.S. District Court (Federal) jury awarded a former female LAPD officer $1 million for far worse treatment than a little dog food someone may, or may not have even taken a bite out of.
CM Parks was a witness for the Defendants and Earl Paysinger was a witness for the Plaintiff. (Parks was Chief at the time. Suit was filed in 1999.)
Basically, Plaintiffs (three female officers; one awarded the million, one ruling for Defense, and one settelment in '05 for $25,000 to the third Plaintiff) claim hostile work environment on the basis of their sex. They complained formally and informally and suffered retaliation including being subject to derogatory comments made by male co-workers.
Complaining Plaintiffs were re-assigned to Valley Traffic Division. They suffered more sex discriminatory environment, open hostility to women as officers in LAPD, a barrage of inappropriate remarks while in roll call and while working, false rumors and retaliation for complaining about harassment.
Evidence includes: metal key ring, Polish sex quiz, Bobbit (is that a “bobble head”) of Beverly Hillbillies and a “Learning to Spell” (book or program).
1) Sexually explicit materials left in station house.
2) Sexually explicit objects passed around in station house.
3) Picture of banana and apples “sexually arranged”.
4) Economics report of loss for plaintiff.
The City plans of filing a motion for a new trial, most likely to be denied by the judge, then the City will appeal, if new trial is denied.
THE STORY HERE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS TYPE OF TREATMENT. AND HOW THE CITY OF LA DOESN'T TAKE THIS STUFF SERIOUSLY. I THINK THE TAXPAYERS WHO KEEP PAYING THESE SETTELMENTS AND AWARDS CARE, THOUGH. How many of these settlements DON'T we find out about. How much more money is LA City's "Animal House" behavior going to be costing taxpayers in the future?
***** UPDATE: COMING SOON TO A FEDERAL JURY TRIAL NEAR YOU: GERAGOS & GERAGOS FILE FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST LAPD FOR KEEPING MAN LOCKED UP FOR TWO MONTHS WHILE FAILING TO PROCESS THE EXCULPATORY DNA THAT SET HIM FREE. Read Story Here *****
CONTACT: Zuma Dogg (310) 928-7544; zumadogg@netzero.com.
MORE LA CITY COVERAGE AT www.zumadogg.blogspot.com
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 5/10/2007 06:19:00 AM
3 Comments:
Little sympathy for the mayor
Re "Lighten up on the mayor," Opinion, May 6
Rob Gurwitt's piece regarding the mayor could have been a wonderful satire — if he hadn't made it so clear that he was actually serious that we're being too hard on L.A.'s main man. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has made it abundantly clear that he cares only about Villaraigosa, the future political aspirations of Villaraigosa, the marketing of Villaraigosa and the using of Villaraigosa's current political position solely as a springboard to some higher elected office for Villaraigosa. Sorry if I seem angry, but I was one of the ones who got duped into voting for Villaraigosa.
DAVID FRITZ
Reseda
I had to laugh when I read the headline "Lighten up on the mayor," especially in light of the events of last week.
Feel sorry for the mayor? I feel sorry for the citizens who bought into the hype and were denied real leadership and are now paying the price. A more accurate assessment of the mayor's performance so far would be "So much promised, so little delivered."
SUSAN BAKER
Los Angeles
Major Mayor Sam Mega Dittoes to David and Susan. Me too. Boy do I feel used.
The City of Los Angeles is not the only governmental organization that does not watch the conduct of its personnel to abide by lawful requirements and then compound the problems by not tending to complaints promptly. The County of L.A. also demonstrates these patterns.
The County has departments that have lots of management coming up through the ranks that have poor management skills, alienate subordinates, castigate productive employees while protecting favored individuals. It happens in various departments and every so often they get caught.
The County's internal operations have management personnel that do not follow the law in many areas, various bases for discrimination and unlawful retaliation included, and the resist correction and compliance.
Often their internal legal advice is flat out wrong, as departments operate individually and contradict the many statutory mandates that should be followed. Poor training and erroneous internal legal interpretations cultivate violations.
There are many departments that operate with tenacious resistance to corrective advice from other county entities when complaints are made. Simple ignorance of the law and obstinance in acknowledging corrections make for a mess that drain tax dollars.
These are the things that go on internally within the system to generate low morale, inefficiency, poor productivity and lawsuits.
An item on "burearcracy" may be more true than simply humorous:
THE RULES OF BUREAUCRACY
1. Preserve thyself.
2. It is easier to fix the blame than to fix the problem.
3. A penny saved is an oversight.
4. Information deteriorates upward.
5. The first 90% of the task takes 90% of the time; the last 10% takes the other 90%.
6. Experience is what you get just after you need it.
7. For any given large, complex, hard-to-understand, expensive problem,there exists at least one short, simple, easy, cheap wrong answer.
8. Anything that can be changed will be, until time runs out.
9. To err is human; to shrug is civil service.
10. There's never enough time to do it right, but there's always enough time to do it over.
___
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home