Sexual harrassment at DJ's

[basilio]

Talking real world solutions, an ambitious young staffer is not going to slap the face or knee the groin of the CEO.

Well in fact the media consensus is that Ms Fraser-Kirk has done exactly that with the eye watering $37m law suit and the extensive grounds upon which she is claiming damages. Just a far savvier response than the old fashioned kick in the nuts.

_________________________________________________

Thought it was bizzare and a bit embarrassing that Allanah Hill outed herself as the brunette that Mark could have very, very, VERY easily taken home from the DJ work function. Had a touch of the stalker about it. Perhaps even a sexual harrassment case ??

Is it possible that was a suite of women who had marked Mark for their bedposts and weren't above putting the hard word on him ?

 

[Julia]

Talking real world solutions, an ambitious young staffer is not going to slap the face or knee the groin of the CEO.

If that solution is unappealing, there are plenty of alternatives which I can assure you work very well and do not impede career progression. Women can be assertive and clear about what is and is not acceptable, without getting carried away with themselves.

Thought it was bizzare and a bit embarrassing that Allanah Hill outed herself as the brunette that Mark could have very, very, VERY easily taken home from the DJ work function. Had a touch of the stalker about it. Perhaps even a sexual harrassment case ??

Is it possible that was a suite of women who had marked Mark for their bedposts and weren't above putting the hard word on him ?

Of course it's possible. For all we know, this may have been Ms Fraser-Kirk's initial course of action until she saw an opportunity for huge advantage.
And - before there is a torrent of vituperation in my direction for even remotely considering such an unpleasant possibility - I am not making any allegation that this was so.

But yes, of course women can be and are sexually predatory.

 

[Calliope]

Of course it's possible. For all we know, this may have been Ms Fraser-Kirk's initial course of action until she saw an opportunity for huge advantage.

In movie land it's called the casting couch. The reason she's going for $37 million is because DJs can afford it. If it had been her boss at the fish and chip shop it would have been $37 thousand, and she would have been awarded $37 hundred.

After the case (if it is not settled on confidential terms) she will flog her story to a women's magazine.

 

[scanspeak]

If the average pay of a full-time salesperson at DJs is $37,000, then will it mean that 1000 of them will need to be sacked to pay the $37,000,000 ?

The over-riding message companies will take from this is Don't Hire Women, especially pretty ones.

 

[Ruby]

The over-riding message companies will take from this is Don't Hire Women, especially pretty ones.

That is rather a blinkered view. Perhaps some of them might get the over-riding message that sexual harassment in the workplace is just not acceptable!

 

[wayneL]

That is rather a blinkered view. Perhaps some of them might get the over-riding message that sexual harassment in the workplace is just not acceptable!

Never forget the law of unintended consequences. Blinkered view or not, our society runs on perceptions. If the perception is that pretty young things could mean trouble, they won't get hired.

 

[tech/a]

If she gets close to the payout watch the increase in topless bar maids!

I had a female stalker a few years ago (A client!!) and she was 28 I was 54.---No I didnt start it!
I thought I was lucky!

I wonder if the "offender" wasnt DJ Head Honcho and was ABC Mechanical repairs with a nett worth of $100K wether there would be the same reaction.

Was one here in Adelaide with a prominent builder for $500K.
Seems if they can pay then litigation is more likely!

 

[Calliope]

Men like Mark McInnes and Bill Clinton are real charmers and women flock to them. Their problem is that their egos are so big that it doesn't occur to them that women are using them too, until they get the bill.

 

[DocK]

From Business Spectator: DJs' Lesson on the Lechorous
It appears that perhaps some big businesses are taking notice of the "message", and if this was her intention, then she has been successful.



http://www.businessspectator.com.au...er-Kirk-pd20100804-7Z42N?OpenDocument&src=sph

Whether Kristy Fraser-Kirk and her charity ever see anything approaching the $37 million in compensation and damages she is seeking from David Jones for being sexually harassed by its former chief executive, it is evident that boards and senior executives of other companies are already considering the implications of the affair for their own businesses.

also from the same article:

... but the case has also underscored how potentially destructive, reputationally and financially, harassment issues within a workplace can be.

Companies are already thinking about their processes. If the harasser is the chief executive, what sort of process and what kind of culture encourages staff – senior or junior – to come forward with their allegations and ultimately by-pass their boss and risk their own position and prospects?

Intelligent boards will, however, recognise that they have to devise a response to the DJs affair because the consequences for their own company of complacency could be equally unpleasant.

The DJs experience shows that having a code of conduct isn’t sufficient if the transgressor is senior and intimidating enough. Staff, junior and senior, have to be comfortable and confident that they can come forward with complaints against even the most senior of executives and have them taken seriously and acted upon.

The other lesson that should be drawn, and appears to being absorbed by at least some companies, is that no individual is so valuable that their behaviour can be over-looked. To its credit the DJs board did dismiss – without trying to hide or disguise the reasons for doing so – a chief executive widely credited with the group’s resurgence and its consistently high levels of performance. McInnes is/was an outstanding retailer.


In the light of the DJs experience, one would expect that boards and senior executives, when evaluating their employees, put as much, and hopefully more, emphasis on character as talent.

That’s not just about avoiding the consequences of appointing or elevating a lecherous executive but, as the DJs saga appears to signal, about the strength and courage of those who could, and should, have either stopped the behaviour in its tracks or alerted the DJs board to the nature and behaviour of its chief executive.

 

[DB008]

$37 million is a little bit on the high side l think.

But, l do agree with her on the "sexual harassment" front. This is something that should not be occurring at work. But it often does.

As others has said on this post, telling them to "f**k off" usually does the trick, or a partner who says something along the lines of "Mate, l'll break your neck if u don't stop".
Staff events where alcohol is involved is also a bad mix, but it happens too. X-Mas in July and end of year events notably. And trust me, I've been at functions where people have gone into the handicap loo, locked the door and done stuff...we had to get security to unlock the door, because there was a disabled person who actually need to use it for the right purpose.

 

[IFocus]

Yes I think the $37m is symbolic and for publicity. Ms Fraser-Kirk has already said any settlement would be donated back to other victims of harassment.

Also consider this, the young lady has probably lost her career in PR, ostensibly through no fault of her own. When she asked her superiors at DJs for help, they let her down. I think we're mature enough to admit that in the case of the former CEO, where there's smoke there's probably fire.

Talking real world solutions, an ambitious young staffer is not going to slap the face or knee the groin of the CEO.

Think you are on the money and given the amount of time and effort I have seen company's go to these days to have everyone complete training about the very subject its extraordinary DJ's has the problem caused by a CEO.

 

[Julia]

Ms Fraser-Kirk has already said any settlement would be donated back to other victims of harassment.

From today's "Australian":

Three victims of alleged sexual misconduct referred to in a $37 million legal action brought against David Jones still work for the upmarket department store, having resolved their concerns.

While the 25 year old has said she would donate any punitive damages to a charity working in the area of sexual harassment and bullying, she will retain any other damages or compensation awarded. She has so far declined to specify how much would be donated in the event of a settlement.

 

[scanspeak]

Looks like she's already backtracked from that outdoor press interview (Aug 4th) where she said ALL of the proceeds would go to charity. Contrast the statements below to those in Julia's post above.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/no-gets-no-firmer-than-a-37-million-lawsuit-20100803-115el.html

"She has pledged to give it all to an as-yet unknown charity for harassment victims, should she win. Her lawyers say they are working pro bono."

If you ask me, $37M is nothing more than extortion.

 

[Tink]

Think you are on the money and given the amount of time and effort I have seen company's go to these days to have everyone complete training about the very subject its extraordinary DJ's has the problem caused by a CEO.

Yep I agree

I see he is now flying back to help out the company.

 

[basilio]

Well at least the sexual harassment of Kirsty Fraser-Kirk and the subsequent fall out has well and truly opened up the question about what people should be subjected to in the work place. Leonie Wood writing for The Age picks up on some salient points.

WHAT price for a quick feel? Or how much would it cost to shut you up? That's where the level of debate seems to be raging over the lawsuit faced by retailer David Jones over Kristy Fraser-Kirk's sexual harassment claims.

The victim wants $37 million. The perpetrator, Mark McInnes, got $2 million when dumped from David Jones - $445,421 of contractual entitlements plus $1.5 million to ensure the former chief executive doesn't take his retailing skills elsewhere.

Eyebrows rose when McInnes's payout was revealed, but then everyone nodded sagely and accepted it as a commercial necessity. But be the unhappy person whom he fumbled and try to exact financial revenge through the courts, and whoahh … don't dare ask for too much.

Leonie then discusses how this claim would be treated in America and the various court processes she is using in Australia.

Maybe the headline figure of $37 million does exhibit a dramatic touch - and maybe that's a good thing, because whether Fraser-Kirk or her ascribed charities win a penny or not becomes irrelevant. Already it has effected change by shining a light on this extraordinarily complicated area.

Simply by filing such a huge claim for behaviour that some people mistakenly consider trivial, and by doing it against such a prominent businessman, Fraser-Kirk has made men (and women) talk openly about sexual harassment.

She has triggered vigorous debates about how far is too far. She has forced companies, especially middle-management and boards, to think hard about whether internal complaints processes and human resources practices are adequate.

And she has highlighted in a most public way how gross, offensive and wrong some kinds of behaviour might be.

For all the legislation and company codes that purport to bar or curtail sexual harassment and discrimination, it still prevails in many workplaces. Will the claim succeed? Definitely not in its current form. Is it a stunt? Probably. Does that make it worthless? No.

Hear hear.

 

[DocK]

Well at least the sexual harassment of Kirsty Fraser-Kirk and the subsequent fall out has well and truly opened up the question about what people should be subjected to in the work place. Leonie Wood writing for The Age picks up on some salient points.



Leonie then discusses how this claim would be treated in America and the various court processes she is using in Australia.



Hear hear.

Found my head nodding as I read the article, so I must agree with you on this one

 

[Calliope]

Found my head nodding as I read the article, so I must agree with you on this one

Yeah. Me too.

Will the claim succeed? Definitely not in its current form. Is it a stunt? Probably. Does that make it worthless? No.

It probably is a stunt, and the publicity Fraser-Kirk is getting will be worth a lot to her in her next endeavours.

 

[Logique]

Hasn't thought of going into politics has she? Doors would open I'd say. She'd make a fearsome advocate.

 

[basilio]

Hasn't thought of going into politics has she? Doors would open I'd say. She'd make a fearsome advocate.

Does look good doesn't she? I think she would be too forthright and probably too moral to stomach the deals that politics appears to require.

Could easily end up campaigning on workplace sexual harassment issues though. Certainly a good fit.

________________________________________________________________

Overlooked the URl for The Age story
http://www.theage.com.au/national/h...-light-on-a-complex-issue-20100806-11olv.html

 

[basilio]

Another story in The Age expands on what currently is happening with sexual harassment issues and why the current case offers an opportunity to properly review what is acceptable or not.

[

B]Life wasn't meant to be sleazy, especially for women at work[/B]
August 7, 2010

For most women subject to sexual harassment at work, the old rules still apply. They grin and bear it, and when it gets too much they quit. They work in small business and shops and male-dominated offices, and they lack the confidence to make their complaint public. If it were not for women such as Kristy Fraser-Kirk, who has taken David Jones to court, sexual harassment would remain an abstraction, its sordid details hidden from public view, or buried in secret conciliation sessions behind closed doors.

Every cause needs brave people to take a stand and fight for their rights, otherwise rights are eroded for everyone. Most cases of sexual harassment are never formally reported to a manager, or to the Australian Human Rights Commission. Cases that are reported to the commission are conciliated and usually end with the woman's resignation and a small payment of $5000 to $15,000. A confidentiality agreement deprives the public of ever hearing about the matter. Every now and then the commission publishes brief case studies with names changed.

It is good work that can bring individual justice. But it is bloodless stuff. Shorn of detail and identities, these secret conciliations rarely make the news, let alone the front page. They have little wider educative effect. The commission has no power to impose penalties on errant employers. Workers unhappy with the conciliation outcome must pursue the complaint in the Federal Court. Most don't, lacking the means, and fearing adverse cost orders should they lose.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/so...ecially-for-women-at-work-20100806-11oec.html