“The split decision means that while the judge will not allow the legal claims of harassment to be considered at trial, he views the events that unfolded after the events Ms. Lively complained about to be worthy of a jury’s scrutiny.”
That’s something at least. The retaliation part is still going to trial. Either way I unfortunately think the public will continue to side with the man that sexually harassed her and tried to ruin her career. Because of course.
hatramroany on
>Liman ruled that Lively could not bring a sexual harassment claim under federal law because she was an independent contractor.
So you can sexually harass someone so long as they’re an independent contractor? What?
cucumberbun on
“Doofus” is one of my favorite insults.
PeopleEatingPeople on
Multiple claims have survived, especially regarding those around retaliation. Her workplace harassment claims are only ”gutted”, what a nasty word btw, because of a technicality that she is considered an independent contractor. Which means absolutely terrible news for actors and actresses everywhere. Or any independent contractors. And the ”fans” of this supposed male feminist will cheer that independent contractors won’t be protected from SH.
RoseGoldRedditor on
Wow. Absolutely absurd that contractors don’t have protections against sexual harassment.
theykilledcassandra on
This is huge. All the sexual harassment charges are dismissed. Wtf.
Lokaji on
The guilds are going to have to add some language to counteract the precedent this sets.
starrylightway on
I’m no legal expert or attorney (and anything I say here is my opinion from experience and not as an attorney or legal advisor). However, I have faced workplace sexual harassment (in California) as an employee. The retaliation parts of my claim were always the parts that had a heavier legal weight. Unfortunately, due to white patriarchy and misogyny ingrained in our societal belief systems, it’s easier for people to digest the retaliation part of claims than the actual harm from harassment or assault. So, while it’s frustrating that the harassment piece is no longer in play, the retaliation aspect is still very much alive.
I hope lawmakers see the justification for dismissing the workplace sexual harassment piece due to Lively being an “independent contractor” and not an employee and close that loophole!
Additionally, for independent contractors: you work via contract, so the contract is king. My current job responsibilities include recruiting contractors and we are *constantly* referencing the terms in the contract. If you are signing on to work as a contractor, look at those terms closely and ensure they include anti-harassment clauses that essentially give the same protections as Title VII. The legal system takes contract terms very seriously, and right now that is an independent contractor’s best bet for ensuring protections are in place and consequences are available if those provisions are breached.
Resident_Ad5153 on
It wasn’t gutted. The claim that actually mattered was retaliation which is going to trial. That’s the claim about the smear campaign.
Intelligent_Buyer516 on
Not surprised . Actors are independent contractors and you can not use California law for acts that happened in New Jersey . Makes sense to me. Her lawyers dropped the ball thinking she would be considered an independent contractor
Carosello on
I have no opinion either way but you know the misogynists are going to run with this
12 Comments
I support the judge in this decision
“The split decision means that while the judge will not allow the legal claims of harassment to be considered at trial, he views the events that unfolded after the events Ms. Lively complained about to be worthy of a jury’s scrutiny.”
That’s something at least. The retaliation part is still going to trial. Either way I unfortunately think the public will continue to side with the man that sexually harassed her and tried to ruin her career. Because of course.
>Liman ruled that Lively could not bring a sexual harassment claim under federal law because she was an independent contractor.
So you can sexually harass someone so long as they’re an independent contractor? What?
“Doofus” is one of my favorite insults.
Multiple claims have survived, especially regarding those around retaliation. Her workplace harassment claims are only ”gutted”, what a nasty word btw, because of a technicality that she is considered an independent contractor. Which means absolutely terrible news for actors and actresses everywhere. Or any independent contractors. And the ”fans” of this supposed male feminist will cheer that independent contractors won’t be protected from SH.
Wow. Absolutely absurd that contractors don’t have protections against sexual harassment.
This is huge. All the sexual harassment charges are dismissed. Wtf.
The guilds are going to have to add some language to counteract the precedent this sets.
I’m no legal expert or attorney (and anything I say here is my opinion from experience and not as an attorney or legal advisor). However, I have faced workplace sexual harassment (in California) as an employee. The retaliation parts of my claim were always the parts that had a heavier legal weight. Unfortunately, due to white patriarchy and misogyny ingrained in our societal belief systems, it’s easier for people to digest the retaliation part of claims than the actual harm from harassment or assault. So, while it’s frustrating that the harassment piece is no longer in play, the retaliation aspect is still very much alive.
I hope lawmakers see the justification for dismissing the workplace sexual harassment piece due to Lively being an “independent contractor” and not an employee and close that loophole!
Additionally, for independent contractors: you work via contract, so the contract is king. My current job responsibilities include recruiting contractors and we are *constantly* referencing the terms in the contract. If you are signing on to work as a contractor, look at those terms closely and ensure they include anti-harassment clauses that essentially give the same protections as Title VII. The legal system takes contract terms very seriously, and right now that is an independent contractor’s best bet for ensuring protections are in place and consequences are available if those provisions are breached.
It wasn’t gutted. The claim that actually mattered was retaliation which is going to trial. That’s the claim about the smear campaign.
Not surprised . Actors are independent contractors and you can not use California law for acts that happened in New Jersey . Makes sense to me. Her lawyers dropped the ball thinking she would be considered an independent contractor
I have no opinion either way but you know the misogynists are going to run with this