Jump to content

Paula Deen Has Type 2 Diabetes


FunnyJohn

Recommended Posts

I think one of reasons that Paula didn't reveal her diagnosis was to protect her son Bobby, who was developing his own show. The backlash would have made Bobby less appealing and more of a gamble for a network.

But isn't that the show where he re-makes his mother's recipes to make them healthier? I'd think that would have actually given a decent synergy to the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one of reasons that Paula didn't reveal her diagnosis was to protect her son Bobby, who was developing his own show. The backlash would have made Bobby less appealing and more of a gamble for a network.

But once a drug company came along with a sweet enough deal - well, F Bobby?

The root of the issue wasn't that she kept it secret, rather that whatever reasons she had to keep it secret were trumped when she could get paid enough to go public with it.

People certainly have the right to change their mind - but she's having her cake and eating it too by selling the poison then selling the antidote.

But alas, such a person might just keep a secret to protect her son, then reveal the secret to collect money from a pharmecutical company. Wouldn't surprise me too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bobby's show theme is perennial, diabetes or not. He's been doing healthier dishes on Paula's show for a while now.

So....then he wouldn't need her to protect him by keeping diabetes on the downlow?

I'm sorry, this just really gets my goat. At 12 months, my daughter was diagnosed with type 1 and nearly died when her body organs started shutting down before we knew what was going on. Once in the hospital, she got an IV to give her fluids (including insulin) to stabilize her. Then that IV broke inside her thigh...as I held her...and she began to bleed from an artery. Thanks to diabetes, I found myself pinning my screaming, infant daughter down as a stranger plunged a knife into her thigh...without anethesia. It was the hardest thing to not punch this guy in the face - and yet I had to hold my daughter down so he could hurt her - to save her life. Diabetes isn't a damn negotiation tool. And her makeup-caked ass gets to make money coming and going from it? F her and the cheese casserole she rode in on.

Could she change her stripes and begin to give instead of only take? Maybe, and when she does, I will change my opinion of her and her actions. Until that time, I won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diabetes isn't a damn negotiation tool.

Nor is it a public right to know the medical status of public personalities. Health is personal, folks. Neither she nor anyone else is obligated to lay out her private, medical issues and decisions for societal approval. While she could have chosen to step up and use that information to change the world or whatever, that would be a pretty damn courageous and personal choice--and not an obligation. When I was first diagnosed with my health issues, I kept them to myself. As years passed, and I've come to grips with them, and now I'm more open about it all. And you can bet your sweet ass that if someone offered me $X million today to shill for the medication that saved my life, I'd take it in a second, even if I wouldn't have even mentioned it in polite society just a year ago. Let's have a little empathy here. She's just human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So....then he wouldn't need her to protect him by keeping diabetes on the downlow?

******

I wonder if Paula wanted to protect Bobby's show from the inevitable blowback. Who knows. I'm just pondering and have no idea what machinations there are in Paula's family and camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor is it a public right to know the medical status of public personalities. Health is personal, folks. Neither she nor anyone else is obligated to lay out her private, medical issues and decisions for societal approval. While she could have chosen to step up and use that information to change the world or whatever, that would be a pretty damn courageous and personal choice--and not an obligation. When I was first diagnosed with my health issues, I kept them to myself. As years passed, and I've come to grips with them, and now I'm more open about it all. And you can bet your sweet ass that if someone offered me $X million today to shill for the medication that saved my life, I'd take it in a second, even if I wouldn't have even mentioned it in polite society just a year ago. Let's have a little empathy here. She's just human.

(I use the word empathize loosely here, since most of this is not my immediate experience, but just an effort at imaginative understanding.)

I can empathize with her receiving an unpleasant medical diagnosis. That's not easy for anyone, in any walk of life.

I can empathize with wanting to keep that medical diagnosis private, especially when that illness is fairly or not associated with a lifestyle, body type, region, or other issue that many look down upon, judge, and cast aspersions upon.

I can empathize with not wanting to damage one's brand or business, especially if there may be a perception between one's illness and that brand.

I can even empathize with taking millions to promote a medication that may help in managing that disease.

What I can't empathize with is, in making your illness public, refusing to make your skill, what got you set on the path to fame and fortune in the first place, as the primary vehicle for addressing the issue, especially when that can have a direct and beneficial impact upon that illness.

I can't empathize with making your name more important--and more financially lucrative--than your talent, and effectively dishonoring that talent, the thing that drew people to you and made your name.

I can't empathize with taking millions to promote a medication that may help in managing that disease if I haven't used my talent first to address the issue.

Yes, she's only human--but it's the human qualities directly related to her cooking that drew people to her, and it's just hard not to feel that she's dishonored those talents--and, in turn, her followers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor is it a public right to know the medical status of public personalities. Health is personal, folks. Neither she nor anyone else is obligated to lay out her private, medical issues and decisions for societal approval. While she could have chosen to step up and use that information to change the world or whatever, that would be a pretty damn courageous and personal choice--and not an obligation. When I was first diagnosed with my health issues, I kept them to myself. As years passed, and I've come to grips with them, and now I'm more open about it all. And you can bet your sweet ass that if someone offered me $X million today to shill for the medication that saved my life, I'd take it in a second, even if I wouldn't have even mentioned it in polite society just a year ago. Let's have a little empathy here. She's just human.

No.

I didn't seek her medical history. She chose to reveal it to me. I would have respected her right to privacy.

But instead she uses her celebrity to hawk pharmacuticals in an effort to get people to buy. Meanwhile, she's using her celebrity to hawk her 'brand' - including recipes (and the related books and such) that directly contribute to the Type 2 version of the disease, the type she has.

So which does she want me to do? Ignore diabetes risk by eating a Paula Deen diet? Or address diabetes with her recommended medicine? Or much worse - does she really want us to think she's so evil as to want MORE people to get diabetes so her drug sponsor will make more money - and she makes money off the whole chain of obesity and disease?

She's chosen her public path and left us to figure it out. I didn't pry into her personal life. But I have every right to question her public life and what's she trying to sell me - until she decides to shut up about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor is it a public right to know the medical status of public personalities. Health is personal, folks. Neither she nor anyone else is obligated to lay out her private, medical issues and decisions for societal approval. While she could have chosen to step up and use that information to change the world or whatever, that would be a pretty damn courageous and personal choice--and not an obligation. When I was first diagnosed with my health issues, I kept them to myself. As years passed, and I've come to grips with them, and now I'm more open about it all. And you can bet your sweet ass that if someone offered me $X million today to shill for the medication that saved my life, I'd take it in a second, even if I wouldn't have even mentioned it in polite society just a year ago. Let's have a little empathy here. She's just human.

She is a FAMOUS person. And, it has seemed to me for many years now, too many people who become famous don't understand the price they will pay in terms of loss of privacy. Personal privacy requires diligent safeguarding at all times, even for us non-famous people. Social networks make that job even harder. Nevertheless, nobody is going to protect your privacy but you. It just never ceases to amaze me how so-called smart people get caught all the time saying or doing something stupid and then are shocked, Shocked, I tell you, when they get called out for it--or even fired. They seem to think that Freedom of Speech means they can say absolutely anything and still expect to be paid and/or congratulated for their "candor." Really? I make decisions all the time about who I will and will not support with either my votes or my money based on what the manufacturers or shills really stand for or the public stances they take. No one is entitled to my money (Uncle Sam excepted, of course), including corporations like Georgia-Pacific, or my attention, including, say, Pat Buchanan. This is what Paula Deen doesn't seem to understand and why playing on the public stage that has trap doors requires due diligence. She gave up her right to privacy regarding her health when she went for the big bucks. If it hadn't been for that, who would know? She could have just kept on with what made her rich and famous in the first place and no one outside her family would have known the difference.

ETA: I was typing this while jayandstacey was typing his remarks, which is why they sorta correspond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's not a chef. She's not even a particularly inventive cook. Paula Deen is a caricature created by the Food Network that sells a certain anti-elitist, anti-intellectual approach to food. Her own decisions aside, I'm sure her employer has no interest in repositioning her brand. Her shtick reminds me a little of Paul Prudhomme, who wasn't nearly as vilified for peddling caloric cuisine despite being too obese to walk.

If you don't like her actions, then don't watch her show or buy her books. Sure, it would be nice to see her use her celebrity for education, but IMO she is under no obligation to do so. If we are all responsible for our own choices, then why should we vilify a TV personality for not telling her fans what to do? Aren't they accountable for their own diets?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's not a chef. She's not even a particularly inventive cook. Paula Deen is a caricature created by the Food Network that sells a certain anti-elitist, anti-intellectual approach to food. Her own decisions aside, I'm sure her employer has no interest in repositioning her brand. Her shtick reminds me a little of Paul Prudhomme, who wasn't nearly as vilified for peddling caloric cuisine despite being too obese to walk.

She took it a step further. If Paul P then hawked mobility scooters...you'd have to wonder...Paul P, are you promoting your food in an effort to sell more scooters as your fans become immobile? That's the level to which Paula Deen has taken it. Paul P didn't go there.

If you don't like her actions, then don't watch her show or buy her books. Sure, it would be nice to see her use her celebrity for education, but IMO she is under no obligation to do so. If we are all responsible for our own choices, then why should we vilify a TV personality for not telling her fans what to do? Aren't they accountable for their own diets?

I don't watch (though I have) and I don't care that she shifts to into an education mode. It is the "devil and angel" that I have issue with - she promotes the disease then promotes the cure. Yes, people are accountable for their own diets, but she wouldn't have a platform for either promotion if the compnaies behind each didn't believe it would work - that her word would either sell more butter and cheese or sell more diabetes drugs.

I defend her right to do this BTW. It is a free country. So people are free to be unethical and two-faced...while I can scream about it :) Many more will listen to her, I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get she didn't want to lose her livelihood, but the whole healthy eating, lose weight, we are an obese nation bandwagon is big and getting bigger. There is plenty of money to be made going that route. I'm sure some network would pay big bucks to have her on some weight loss show.

Her son is already cashing in. He has a show in which he converts Deen's Diabetes Inducing recipes into "more healthy" ones on the Cooking Channel. Hilarious [not really] -- he then sends him to his Mom for her to say how yummy they really are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her son is already cashing in. He has a show in which he converts Deen's Diabetes Inducing recipes into "more healthy" ones on the Cooking Channel. Hilarious [not really] -- he then sends him to his Mom for her to say how yummy they really are.

They did a cross-pollination thing on Food Network yesterday, where they aired one of his shows (maybe the first ep) right after Paula's Best Dishes. I tuned in during her show with him, not knowing what it was, and they were making a bean, chard, and turkey sausage stew. I started to wonder if it was actually his show or if she had changed her style. It seemed so unlike her. Then the next thing they made to go with the stew (and they ate both on camera) was a huge club sandwich with bacon, ham, muenster, and a skinless boneless chicken breast per sandwich. THEN they made fried doughnuts with white and chocolate glazes and ate them :blink: . No, that was definitely vintage Paula.

Then his show started with him calling his mother to say how he was changing her recipes, complete with nutritional analysis and a visit from his personal trainer friend. Then he express-mailed her the food at the end, after multiple recitations of the superior nutritional value of his food. Given that they obviously planned to play these shows off each other this way, someone very seriously screwed up in the way they handled PR. No wonder her publicist quit.

As an aside, it may be geared to the audience he's looking for, but the way he treated/spoke about the woman butcher he dealt with in his episode made me furious. (A girl? There's a girl butcher?!!!) :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So as not to pile on, I'm not creating a new thread for this, but Deen and her brother are now being sued for sexual harassment and racial discrimination (by proxy, really, for the latter. You have to read the complaint to understand.)

Both the HuffPo and Radaronline articles only touch on the extent of the complaints. I read the full linked PDF and I can't say it shocked me exactly, but it painted a much more systematic picture of abuse than I expected from reading the articles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gets worse. If you are interested in knowing why Food Network decided not to renew Paula Deen's contract, NPR has the blow by blow along with the deposition transcript.

Oh, my eyes! That deposition :o:blink: I hadn't seen the news about her being dumped by Food Network. She certainly doesn't come across as a "Southern lady" in that questioning.

I was wondering why people were talking about this again in the past few days and then realized that she had been deposed in the lawsuit. It's hard to believe it's been more than a year since I wrote that post above.

I'm not repeating the massaging comments, but I'm sure Don will, even if he has no idea who she is... B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I read the whole freaking deposition and I don't get the controversy. The way I read it, she doesn't use the N word but she does know people who do. She doesn't show pornography to her employees and she doesn't think that's right. Her husband does stuff that would not be acceptable in the best company, and so do other men that she knows. She gives them a pass when she probably should not.

She thinks the woman who is sueing her is PO'ed because she wanted more control and a share of the business, which might be true.

She is protective, maybe over protective, of her brother, who seems to be deeply flawed. Well, in my opinion, we are all deeply flawed. I don't know how many of you could stand up to that type of scrutiny, but I thought she comported herself rather well.

It is hard to talk about race. I am white, my husband is white, our kids are white, and they both have black girlfriends. I would rather never have to talk about race, and racial discrimination, but these are facts. I now know more about black hair than before, and that's just the beginning.

How do you talk about the beautiful dignity that black men and women established for themselves while having few other options but serving others? Boy, talk about hard to do. It's a fact, I have witnessed it, and probably many, if not most, of us who are older witnessed it. It is not something I would have wanted to highlight, and it's, in my opinion, the worst thing she did. But, at the end of the day, the servers at her son's wedding got paid a lot more than their usual day job. Hiring people of color, because of their color, being a bad thing is peculiarly strange to oppose. It's not something I ever would have thought of. Was anybody injured? Only people not of color. Is she a sick f@ck for even thinking of it? I would say that exploiting people of color is what is sick.

She's a cook. If I am going to go with stereotypes, cooks are not too bright, and they are profane and earthy.

And, by the way, butter is beautiful, and butter is not what makes us fat. Carbs, especially sugar, refined flour, and high fructose corn syrup. make us fat. Butter is good for us. Especially grass fed butter, full of Vitamin K. I hope Paula Deen sees the light, but, if not, I have sent the message to you.

Love more, hate less.

Edited to add: she admitted to using the N-word in jokes. See below.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Food Network and Paula Deen were looking to protect their brands. I doubt very much that either one gives a damn about any deeper racial issues that may or may not be here; it's about preserving profits and market share. With her contract up for renewal, FN might have gotten concessions from her, but she still is a high-cost item for them; the calculation to cut her probably seemed reasonably safe--there would be backlash either way. Deen is desperate because without her FN platform, her other lucrative endorsement deals (see above) might be at risk. So, no, this story isn't primarily about race; it's about greed.

I don't expect Paula Deen to be perfect; but it's not too much to expect that she set and maintain standards of behavior in the company she heads, rather than tolerate and arguably participate in behaviors that may demean others. And don't even get me started on her comments, "I don't care about skin color." Maybe without a TV sow to produce she can spend some time studying critical race theory.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Food Network and Paula Deen were looking to protect their brands. I doubt very much that either one gives a damn about any deeper racial issues that may or may not be here; it's about preserving profits and market share. With her contract up for renewal, FN might have gotten concessions from her, but she still is a high-cost item for them; the calculation to cut her probably seemed reasonably safe--there would be backlash either way. Deen is desperate because without her FN platform, her other lucrative endorsement deals (see above) might be at risk. So, no, this story isn't primarily about race; it's about greed.

I don't expect Paula Deen to be perfect; but it's not too much to expect that she set and maintain standards of behavior in the company she heads, rather than tolerate and arguably participate in behaviors that may demean others. And don't even get me started on her comments, "I don't care about skin color." Maybe without a TV sow to produce she can spend some time studying critical race theory.

Race is the immediate hot button issue the media picked up on, but the use of a specific word is not the essence of the lawsuit. The woman who filed the suit is white. In addition to the sexual discrimination/harassment of her, she said that she was trying to protect her African-American employees from abuse. The porn and jokes and the drinking seem to constitute a pretty hostile work environment, if her attorneys can show that in court.

The deposition pretty clearly indicates that Deen is exceptionally protective of her brother. When he was caught stealing money from the business, he ended up being paid more instead of being disciplined, and she rationalizes that it was unfair he had been earning less money than the woman manager who ultimately filed the lawsuit. She says her brother went to rehab but it was really his wife's problem, not his. There are some real gems in there. This is someone she would feature on her shows, with a business she would promote as part of her brand.

I'd also like to know what FN is going to do with her son's show, which often is focused on and features her. I wonder when that contract is up. Advertisers probably aren't going to be flocking to sponsor it under these circumstances.

Ultimately, I really never had any great expectations of good taste from her, given that her original business that led to all of this was a lunch delivery service called "The Bag Lady," which she finds cute/humorous and I never have. She dropped "bag" from the name when she opened her restaurant.

ETA: A link to the history of her business, which shows an image I presume was the logo for The Bag Lady.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked up Paula Deen on Wikipedia and she did admit to using the N-word. It was late, the deposition was long and stupifying, and I was drinking. Sorry. Here's the quote from Wikipedia, and it's pretty weird:

"In her deposition for the suit, Deen stated that she has used the "N Word" at times, saying "Yes, of course" she did, and also acknowledged making racist jokes, though she claims she is not racist. "It's just what they are—they're jokes ... most jokes are about Jewish people, rednecks, black folks. ... I can't determine what offends another person."

She is 68, from the Deep South, and grew up before integration. I am 60, from the Deep South, and grew up before integration. I was taught not to make those kind of jokes, and I don't find them humorous. I don't work in the kind of environment that tolerates those kind of jokes. I don't know what it's like to be her and live her life. Nevertheless, she strikes me as a self-made woman who has accomplished a great deal coming from a very poor family, and she does not appear to have a mean bone in her body, or any self-awareness, and possibly not a brain in her head.

I also took a look at the menu for her restaurant, and you can get gluten-free shrimp and grits, which is nice, because most restaurants don't make it gluten-free.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deposition pretty clearly indicates that Deen is exceptionally protective of her brother.

*****

Agree with your take on this, Pat. The dynamic between Paula and Bubba is key to this case because I think she's been rescuing her F up little brother all his life. When you stop counting the money you give a sibling's failing restaurant after you hit 6 figures, wow.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, now I see why I missed the quote in the deposition. Because whoever posted it on Wikipedia cut-and-pasted her responses to make it look worse than it was. From NPR:

Q. Have you ever used the N-word yourself?

A. Yes, of course. ... But that's just not a word that we use as time has gone on. Things have changed since the '60s in the South.

Later, a lot, later:

Q. One of the things that you had tried to — that you and your husband tried to teach your children was not to use the N-word in a mean way. ... Could you give me an example of how you have demonstrated for them a nice way to use the N-word?

A. We hear a lot of things in the kitchen. Things that they — that black people will say to each other. If we are relaying something that was said, a problem that we're discussing, that's not said in a mean way.

Q. What about jokes, if somebody is telling a joke that's got —

A. It's just what they are, they're jokes.

Q. Would you consider those to be using the N-word in a mean way?

A. That's ... kind of hard. Most — most jokes are about Jewish people, rednecks, black folks. Most jokes target — I don't know, I didn't make up the jokes, I don't know. I can't, I don't know. They usually target, though, a group. Gays or straights, black, redneck, you know, I just don't know — I just don't know what to say. I can't, myself, determine what offends another person.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/06/20/193913397/stuff-you-might-have-missed-in-the-paula-deen-brouhaha

Glad to know I was not as drunk as I feared I was. I still don't condone stuff like that, but I stick by my position that at the deposition, telling her own story, she did not come across as bad as what other people (example, the woman who is suing her) are saying about her, which is what you would expect.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, now I see why I missed the quote in the deposition. Because whoever posted it on Wikipedia cut-and-pasted her responses to make it look worse than it was. From NPR:

Later, a lot, later:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/06/20/193913397/stuff-you-might-have-missed-in-the-paula-deen-brouhaha

Glad to know I was not as drunk as I feared I was. I still don't condone stuff like that, but I stick by my position that at the deposition, telling her own story, she did not come across as bad as what other people (example, the woman who is suing her) are saying about her, which is what you would expect.

I don't know how much of the deposition is included at Wikipedia, since I haven't looked at that. If we're fixating on that single word, she said that she hadn't used it in a long time, referring to the 60s, but she recalls using it when robbed while working at a bank. Someone at either Daily Beast or Jezebel tracked down when that was: 1986. Not so long ago--certainly much later than the 60s. Then there are comments about only using the word in a not-mean way, which rather undermines her credibility. There really aren't many nice ways for a white person to use the word, if any.

Whether she used the word when talking about the plantation wedding theme or not, I don't know, but she does address the issue of having the black waiters serve in a certain way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plantation theme wedding strikes me as the type of crass, insensitive thing a formerly poor person would do when showing off her money. I am going to use an inter-class stereotype, nouveau riche.

I can't tell you how many times I saw dignified black men in white coats serving rich white people when I was growing up. To want to emulate that is, well, how can I improve on crass and insensitive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two good commentaries I've read about this controversy: thank you Russ Parsons and Edward Lee. I'm quoting most of the latter's post because it might require a FB account to access what he had to say after shooting an episode of Paula Deen's show.

"Mrs. Deen was gracious, friendly and funny. Unfortunately, none of those qualities trumps racism. I am not an activist. I am just a cook who lives in the South. But my world encompasses many diverse peoples and races, and I know the hurt and the violence that can sting behind a few choice words, even said in jest.

But leaving Mrs. Deen’s foibles aside, what I was most dismayed about this week were the provocations by a number of outspoken people who over-simplified this vast swath of symbolic land called “The South.” Racist rants, dumb jokes about Southern culture and, at times, a particularly mean-sprited skewering (sorry for the pun) of Mrs. Deen herself. To say things like, “that’s just the way it’s always been” is not only inaccurate, but far worse, it is lazy.

The South that I live and travel in is one that is buoyed by diversity, acceptance, generosity and love – the people and kitchens of the American South have enriched my life with culture and respect. Does the antediluvian stains of racism exist here too? Of course it does. Just like any place where Old World values collide with progressive change, where tradition is asked to bend to modern society. So bascially any place in America. But the South that I choose to live in does not happen by chance, or by wishful thinking. It happens because people choose to participate. They choose to gather and question and communicate and include and shake hands. It takes work to build a community.

Every so often, scandals like these erupt in entertainment, fashion, politics, wherever people and cultures meet. It reminds us of the work that still needs to be done. But the first step is simply to want it. I didn’t hear a lot of that this week. To me, it’s just as easy to build bridges as it is to tear them down. It starts with a choice.
"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She thinks its okay to use the word if the person was a bad person. Um, no, it is not. She also claims that the south is less racist because they treated slaves like family, citing her great grandfather's suicide attempt after the freeing of his slaves as proof of the close relationship. Can we please just acknowledge that this woman is entirely wrong in her attitudes? Whether you hate her or pity her, I hope that nobody here actually believes that she is within the realm of reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She thinks its okay to use the word if the person was a bad person. Um, no, it is not. She also claims that the south is less racist because they treated slaves like family, citing her great grandfather's suicide attempt after the freeing of his slaves as proof of the close relationship. Can we please just acknowledge that this woman is entirely wrong in her attitudes? Whether you hate her or pity her, I hope that nobody here actually believes that she is within the realm of reason.

On that note, Dame Edna gave me a copy of Lindy Boggs' autobiography. I had to put it down after only a few pages when she wrote about the servants her family had-- "They were just like family!" Um, no, they weren't. The woman who worked for Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings in Florida put that idea to rest when she spoke publicly about working for her a few years ago. They didn't sit down at the table with you for dinner, you didn't make sure they had a decent place to live, and if you paid any medical bills for any of them, it was a rarity. The Help was a real fairy tale, but not because the details lacked veracity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judge dimisses the racism part of the suit.

I had thought the reason Jackson was suing on that issue was that she was trying to do her job by protecting her African-American employees from harassment. Not valid, according to the court.  So, if you are a middle manager and the big boss is discriminating against your subordinates who are of a different race than you, you have no legal remedy, even though you are responsible for their well-being at work. Wow.  So can the subordinates sue the manager for not protecting them? because I'm thinking they probably can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Pat, I don't think there is a potential cause of action for racial discrimination against Lisa Jackson, the manager, because she did not participate in the discrimination.  From what I've seen, Lisa Jackson may have a hard time convincing a jury that she was sexually harassed, as well.    Obviously she is not claiming quid quo pro sexual harrassment, but hostile work environment.   In order to prevail, she has to prove, not only that offensive acts were happening, which they clearly were, but that she, personally, found them offensive.  It appears that she did not complain about it until after she left -- not sure whether she was quit or was fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She stayed real Klassy to the end. Thus ensuring that she will never see a single cent from me.

While I know that it's not unknown for restaurants to shut without telling their employees in advance, announcing it on social media before telling the employees is pretty tacky.  At least they gave them severance checks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...