Fired for being too hot?

[easysurfer]

Fired for being too hot? Think that's a plausible case?

Woman says she was fired for being hot

Hmmm.. a lot better than being fired for the alternative reason, I guess

[Westernskies]

This probably explains my infractions....

[clifp]

I think quite a few of the outfits are inappropriate for work.

Bankers should focus on screwing their customers not their coworkers.

[Tesaje]

When did dressing like a hooker become ok in the office? She belongs at Hooters.

[W2R]

We have pinpointed the reason why she was fired, IMO, and it had less to do with her sex than with her inappropriate clothing in an office environment. I would imagine that a guy would have been fired too if he showed up to work wearing only a speedo.

I remember a guy who wanted to wear (conservative, nice, neat) shorts to work in July here in New Orleans, some years ago. It was extremely hot and our A/C system at work was not reliable that particular summer. He was told that shorts were out of the question.

[haha]

What inappropriate clothing are you folks talking about? I only saw this one video with her wearing a conservative looking black skirt, white top and white jacket. Is there another offending video or set of pictures?

Ha

[DeborahB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha What inappropriate clothing are you folks talking about? I only saw this one video with her wearing a conservative looking black skirt, white top and white jacket. Is there another offending video or set of pictures? Ha

I agree - this is how professional women her age dress. Lucky her, she has a nice figure. Not cause for firing. Her skirt is not unusually short, nor is the top particularly tight.

[FinanceDude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp I think quite a few of the outfits are inappropriate for work. Bankers should focus on screwing their customers not their coworkers.

I don;t think the first couple photos were for work, that was "after-work"............

[Katsmeow]

I went and read an article which talks about her allegations. BTW Citibank apparently isn't saying she was fired for wearing inappropriate clothing but for performance issues:

Quote:

Documents lodged with the court complain that two of her immediate bosses told her to stop wearing turtleneck tops, pencil skirts fitted business suits or any other form of tailored attire. When she protested that other women in the office wore the same kind of clothes as her, they allegedly replied that those other women could "wear what they like, as their general unattractiveness rendered moot their sartorial choices, unlike [Lorenzana] whose shapeliness could not be heightened by beautifully tailored clothing." Further humiliation followed, her lawyers contest, because she was relatively tall (5ft 6), and had a "curvaceous figure". She was told not to wear high-heeled business shoes, as this purportedly "drew attention to her body in a manner that was upsetting to her easily distracted male managers".

[Nords]

I wonder what kind of salary an "easily distracted male manager" is worth. Especially if they're upset.

[Texas Proud]

I also don't see any pictures of inappropriate dress... can someone provide links

I have seen many women who where better looking... and some who dress with skimper dress... neither of these had any basis on if they got fired or not... in fact, this usually kept them there even if they were not as qualified...


I would not be voting to giver her anything if I was on the jury... unless she had some very hard evidence to the contrary (... just read my last sentance again.. now waiting... )

[Bestwifeever]

Herre I thought this thread was going to be about the air conditioning in the office.

Of course she's wearing a nice outfit to be interviewed in for the news--no videos of her actually at work or showing examples of what she wore. Fortunately for her lawyer she's a very attractive woman with a great figure--what if she was 50 lbs. overweight and 50 years old? Okay then? DH and I do laugh at what female characters wear in TV dramas--lots of cleavage and short skirts in those offices/courtrooms/police departments. Maybe this woman has been watching too much of those shows.

But the bank my kids worked at had a dress code that everyone was expected to follow; if she took the job know the dress code and wasn't following it, then doesn't the bank have the right to let her go?

Too bad the bank can't present its evidence. Maybe she's right, but we will only hear her side.

[easysurfer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha What inappropriate clothing are you folks talking about? I only saw this one video with her wearing a conservative looking black skirt, white top and white jacket. Is there another offending video or set of pictures? Ha

There weren't links to another video or set of pictures.

Maybe what's too hot is in the eye of the beholder

This reminds me of a situtation a few years ago which I woman was tossed off a plane (I think Southwest) for dressing too provocative, though she wasn't really too provocative.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/20638479

[vicente solano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha What inappropriate clothing are you folks talking about? I only saw this one video with her wearing a conservative looking black skirt, white top and white jacket. Is there another offending video or set of pictures? Ha

I have the same question as you, Ha Ha. What we saw of her attire in Spain ..... We wouldn´t have fired her. Quite the opposite!!

[vicente solano]

And, from what I heard, she wasn´t fired, technically speaking. There was some kind of mutual agreement on finishing the working relation, with a substantial compensation.
May I stray a little and ask if it is true that in the USA, in general terms, of course, that an employee can get the boot for little or no reason, and anyway, with very little compensation?
Here in Spain there are strict legal reasons-in theory- for firing, and the leagal compensation for an unfair termination is 45 days of salary per year of contract with a limit of 42 months. There are plenty of situations in which despite having been a fair termination (economical reasons) you have a compenstion of 20 daÿ´s salary with a limit of 12 months.
In your TV shows one gets the impression that you can get dismissed for nothing with no notice and a week´s compensiation!!!

[Orchidflower]

When a gal has big taa-taa's like she has, she should make an effort to wear a higher neckline I believe; because, when you bend over...well....
Alot of saleswomen--mostly the ones who can't sell well--wear lower tops. It's called the "t*tty close." I never ever did it nor approved of it myself, because, to me, it's demeaning to all of us (women). It just looks so....well, unprofessional. Just IMHO.

She's a beautiful gal, tho, but think she's doing herself a disservice making this public, 'cause she surely is sending out resumes now. I just think it's a dumb political move on her part overall. Does she really think IBM is going to call her and offer her a job now that this has been splattered all over the world media? She's probably lost alot of respect from her fellow employees with all this I'd bet. Again, just IMHO.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vicente solano And, from what I heard, she wasn´t fired, technically speaking. There was some kind of mutual agreement on finishing the working relation, with a substantial compensation. May I stray a little and ask if it is true that in the USA, in general terms, of course, that an employee can get the boot for little or no reason, and anyway, with very little compensation? Here in Spain there are strict legal reasons-in theory- for firing, and the leagal compensation for an unfair termination is 45 days of salary per year of contract with a limit of 42 months. There are plenty of situations in which despite having been a fair termination (economical reasons) you have a compenstion of 20 daÿ´s salary with a limit of 12 months. In your TV shows one gets the impression that you can get dismissed for nothing with no notice and a week´s compensiation!!!

Varies by state. I live in an "at will employment" state where you can fire someone without cause for virtually any non-discriminatory reason and give them zero notice and zero compensation. "I don't like the color of your shirt" or "Today the sky is blue and your last name is Blue" is a valid reason. Not that a reason is ever required. No severance or separation payments are required in my state, except paying out someone's accrued but unused vacation time if that is part of the employee's agreement. Most employees in this state work in "at will" positions and do not have a formal employment agreement that guarantees them a fixed period of employment (ie 1 year at $50,000 per year). Professionals included.

From our state's unemployment office:
"The term "Employment-at-Will" means unless there is a specific law to protect employees or there is an employment contract providing otherwise, then an employer can treat its employees as it sees fit (including the assignment of demeaning tasks) and the employer can discharge an employee at the will of the employer for any reason or no reason at all."

Discriminatory treatment based on a protected class (race, religion, color, nationality, disability, age, etc) is prohibited, as is termination as retaliation in some circumstances.

The main reason an employer would want a valid reason to terminate an employee is to keep their unemployment insurance premiums low. Employers who have high proportions of their payroll being terminated without cause end up with a worse rating for their unemployment insurance premiums. So it costs them some.

In practice, employees are frequently given two weeks notice if they are being terminated. Sometimes they work out the remaining two weeks, sometimes they just get paid for the two weeks and are escorted out the door and their personal effects are mailed to them by HR. For cause terminations don't always get the two weeks severance. Practices vary widely though. In return, it is considered professional to give your employer two weeks notice if you are quitting. I don't know if this is common to all states, and the two weeks notice from employee to employer may be longer for "key person" positions.

But yes, it is kind of like TV portrays it. One day the president of the company can walk in and say "You've been too lippy lately, and I don't like it. Pack your crap, you're fired." Like Donald Trump does it! Then you get an attorney from the back cover of the phone book to sue your employer for wrongful termination and/or discrimination of some sort because you are/are not a minority, are/are not a female, are/are not pregnant, are/are not a certain religion, etc. The American Way! I was exaggerating about the hiring a lawyer part. The large majority of terminations do not result in the terminated employee seeking legal redress.

[scrabbler1]

A few years ago I had to get a bank check when I bought my car. The teller there was a young, chesty woman wearing a low-cut top. This was not a speedy transaction for a teller to make but for some reason I did not mind one bit.

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vicente solano And, from what I heard, she wasn´t fired, technically speaking. There was some kind of mutual agreement on finishing the working relation, with a substantial compensation. May I stray a little and ask if it is true that in the USA, in general terms, of course, that an employee can get the boot for little or no reason, and anyway, with very little compensation? Here in Spain there are strict legal reasons-in theory- for firing, and the leagal compensation for an unfair termination is 45 days of salary per year of contract with a limit of 42 months. There are plenty of situations in which despite having been a fair termination (economical reasons) you have a compenstion of 20 daÿ´s salary with a limit of 12 months. In your TV shows one gets the impression that you can get dismissed for nothing with no notice and a week´s compensiation!!!

As Fuego said... (we live in the same state)....

But Citi does have an employee handbook and might have different rules which they must follow... but if she were in a position of having a dress code (think teller etc.), then if she refused to wear that... or altered it in a way that did not give the vibes the company wanted... they can fire her.. usually she would be told... get written up... have a plan of action etc. etc... before it happens... seems she did not want to change and be more appropriate.

This is a LONG time ago... like 35 years ago... I was an intern for IBM and they fired the receptionist because she would not wear a bra... funny that I did not notice.. but she usually had a jacket or sweater on... maybe she 'showed' certain people...

I am surprised they offered her any compensation... unless she were threatening some kind of sexual harrasement claim and they just decided to pay her to get rid of her....

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud As Fuego said... (we live in the same state)....

We do?? I assumed you were in TX?