Replies

She sued ISI? For what?

She sued under Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) auspices on grounds that she lost her job at ISI because her successor at her job was male and she was therefore fired because she was a woman. She also sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress. She was asking for quite a bit of money as I recall - something like 8 figures.

She sued under Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) auspices on grounds that she lost her job at ISI because her successor at her job was male and she was therefore fired because she was a woman

Not correct. Not a bad attempt, but not exactly accurate.

Christine was fired 24 minutes after telling ISI leaders that she had asked the EEOC about her rights as an employee. ISI previously thought she was asking the EEOC about vacation policy. When Christine emailed back that she was asking them NOT about vacation policy but about their disparate treatment, ISI fired her. That is illegal.

BEFORE being let go, Christine asked the EEOC -- and me as well as an attorney at the time -- about ISI having a woman with 15 years experience report to a man just out of college who had no marketing experience other than a little training CHristine herself had given him.

Christine headed a department, but when her male boss went on sabbatical, ISI wanted to make sure that a woman was under the "covering" of a man. So they put a 15 year veteran of marketing under a man who was not qualified for the job.

The Position Description required at least 5 years experience. Doug Schneider had less than 2 years, most of it Christine training him and him packing up books sold for shipment or answering the phones.

So a man who did not meet the qualifications of the position was put into a position he could not qualify for, and a woman with 3 times as much experience as required was ordered to report to a man -- so that no woman would be a leader standing alone. Every woman had to have a man "covering" her in ISI's culture.

After that, the case went to a hearing before the unemployment commission, WHERE CHRISTINE WON, AND ISI LOST. ISI made all the same arguments to the Administrative Law Judge, but lost. So the only hearings that ever happened showed Christine the winner, and ISI's arguments were rejected as not credible.