Author: HFNewsAdmin

Posted on

Sarah Glenn: A Testimony of Resilience and Integrity

Forced arbitration clauses challenge consumers, employees. Helmer Friedman LLP aggressively protect your rights.

In September 2020, Sarah Glenn began her tenure as the Small Systems Certified Water Plant Operator for the city of Florence, Colorado. A professional, knowledgeable, and highly qualified woman in her field, Glenn brought unmatched integrity to her position. However, her time at the city’s water treatment plant was marred by repeated instances of sexual harassment, retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The culprits? Two city employees, Lori Cobler and Brandon Harris.

Glenn attests that Brandon Harris, the city’s Water Superintendent and Operator since 2015, showed a history of improper behavior during his tenure. His record included infractions such as using government-owned equipment for personal use and working under the influence of alcohol. Despite these serious allegations, Harris was allowed to retain his position. A flagrant example of male privilege, his shortcomings, and malfeasance were swept under the rug, even as Glenn’s allegations of sexual harassment based on her sex were dismissed or outright ignored.

Moreover, Glenn was defamed by Lori Cobler, the city’s Finance Director and interim Human Resources Director. She spread false information about Glenn, damaging her reputation and work ethic and ultimately leading to her termination.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) explicitly protect employees from sexual harassment and retaliation. Yet, despite these clear legal guidelines, Glenn was subject to an abusive work environment.

This scenario shines a spotlight on a pervasive issue in our society: men, especially those in higher positions, are often allowed to underperform with impunity, while others – particularly minorities and women – are held to an impossibly high standard. Those who are professional, knowledgeable, and highly qualified for their jobs can often highlight the inadequacies of these men, making them targets of retaliation and malicious behavior.

The journey to justice for Sarah Glenn has been long and arduous, but the ultimate victory serves as a potent reminder of the importance of standing up to discrimination and retaliation. The first step toward justice is knowing your rights and seeking legal counsel. With the support of an employment law attorney, Glenn fought back against her oppressors and received a total settlement of $195,000. This sum accounted for her lost wages, non-wage damages, attorney fees, and case expenses.

Discrimination and retaliation have no place in a respectful and professional environment. It’s important to hold those who behave otherwise accountable. Drawing strength from Sarah Glenn’s story, let’s pledge to confront such situations head-on and ensure our workplaces are safe and respectful spaces for everyone.

Seeking advice from an experienced employment law attorney is crucial whenever you, a family member, or a friend suspect sexual discrimination in the workplace. These legal professionals possess the expertise needed to assess your situation, provide guidance on your rights, and chart the best course of action. Sexual discrimination often goes unaddressed due to fear or uncertainty, but consulting with a qualified attorney can empower individuals to take informed steps toward justice. An attorney acts as a critical advocate, ensuring that your voice is heard and that those responsible are held accountable for their actions.

Posted on

Thurgood Marshall

Black History Month - Helmer Friedman LLP.

Thurgood Marshall made immeasurable strides for the civil rights movement during his lifetime.

Working under his mentor and well-known civil rights icon Charles Hamilton Houston at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Marshall successfully argued Brown v. Board of Education which famously declared unconstitutional the “separate but equal” doctrine.

In 1965, Marshall became the first black person appointed to the post of U.S. Solicitor General. Two years later, he became the first black person appointed to the United States Supreme Court, where he served until 1991.

Posted on

Tech Industry Retaliation Misusing The Defend Trade Secrets Laws

Trust the attorneys of Helmer Friedman LLP to aggressively protect employee rights to a workplace free from discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

In the complex and ever-changing world of business, the laws established to protect trade secrets have recently been turned on their head. Instead of safeguarding proprietary information, a troubling trend is emerging where these laws are being employed as a weapon against employees. Companies across a wide spectrum of industries are cleverly exploiting trade secrets legislation as a legal strategy to strike back against claims of discrimination, unethical behavior, and whistleblowing.

This tactical approach accuses employees of misusing confidential information or proprietary business data. Strikingly, companies pursue these accusations even in instances where the information was procured or disseminated for valid reasons. These may include exposing illegal activities or reporting workplace misconduct.

Some workers were sued after gathering evidence of perceived wrongdoing in the workplace, what some attorneys call “self-help discovery” — despite whistleblower protections in the law.

The Defend Trade Secrets Act, championed and signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2016, ironically offers the legal foundation these companies need to launch trade secrets claims in federal courts. Under the provisions of this law, a trade secret is deemed misappropriated if it was accessed or unveiled without consent or through inappropriate methods, with no consideration given to whether it was shared with a competitor. This act has consequently lowered the bar for companies intent on taking legal action against employees suspected of breaching trade secrets.

For employees who have clues or evidence about such instances, it is crucial to contact an employment law attorney who specializes in employment law and has experience with whistleblower reporting. Legal professionals in this field can offer advice and represent individuals confronted with accusations of trade secrets as a form of employer retaliation. Having a clear understanding of your rights and available options when facing these potential legal hurdles is of paramount importance.

In conclusion, the fallout from the misuse of trade secrets laws to punish employees can be severe, encompassing financial setbacks, reputation damage, and emotional trauma. However, through a heightened awareness of this issue and by acquiring legal assistance, individuals can better shield themselves and fight back against unjust retaliation from employers.

This post was based on information in an article by Rob Price, a senior correspondent for Business Insider, who writes features and investigations about the technology industry.

Posted on

Age Discrimination Retaliation in Tech Industry Using Trade Secrets Law

Age discrimination is illegal and the ADEA protects employees.

Greg Robillard, a seasoned programmer at Opal Labs, initially saw the tech industry as a field full of promise and innovation. However, he soon discovered that it was anything but inclusive. Robillard encountered age discrimination and harassment—experiences that, unfortunately, are still too common today. He was often mocked as “old Greg” and dismissed as “some old guy in his 40s,” becoming the target of age-based jokes. The toxic environment escalated beyond mere words when he was let go for missing a meeting due to personal reasons, while younger colleagues faced no consequences for similar actions.

In a courageous move, Robillard filed a lawsuit against Opal Labs for age discrimination, among other claims. However, his quest for justice took an unexpected turn. Opal Labs retaliated by countersuing him, accusing him of violating trade secret laws by posting proprietary code on his GitHub account. This accusation was not about enforcing discipline or protecting intellectual property—it was a tactic intended to paint Robillard as a villain and distract from his age discrimination claim.

What followed was a grueling four-year legal battle, during which Robillard had to defend not only his claim but also his character. This situation highlights a troubling trend where companies misuse trade secret laws as a weapon against those accusing them of mistreatment.

$1,643,000.00 Mr. Greg Helmer of Helmer Friedman LLP obtained an award on behalf of an employee who had been discriminated against and harassed because of his age.

It is crucial to recognize the legal protections available for workers facing age discrimination. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) serves as a strong defense against discrimination, specifically protecting individuals aged 40 and over. Additionally, there are laws designed to shield employees from retaliation when they report age discrimination.

This narrative emphasizes the importance of seeking legal assistance for anyone facing similar circumstances. If you have experienced age discrimination, harassment, or retaliation in the workplace, consulting with an experienced employment law attorney is vital. Remember, you have the right to a fair and age-inclusive work environment. It is time to stand up against discrimination and retaliation. By refusing to be silenced, we compel employers to reconsider their actions regarding age. Age is not a liability; rather, it reflects our valuable experiences, wisdom, and resilience.

Posted on

Standing Up to Harassment and Discrimination in Science and Academia

Constitutional rights lawyers of Helmer Friedman LLP.

The Role of an Employment Attorney Standing Up to Harassment and Discrimination in Science and Academia

The fields of science and academia are often seen as exciting spaces for discovery, innovation, and enlightenment. However, they can also hide a darker side that includes sexual misconduct, harassment, and discrimination. These issues particularly affect women and women of color and persist despite the progress that has been made in these areas.

A recent article in Scientific American discusses these widespread problems. The authors—including Rukmani Vijayaraghavan, Kristy L. Duran, Kelly Ramirez, Jane Zelikova, Emily Lescak, and the organization 500 Women Scientists—share their personal experiences and highlight the systemic harassment and discrimination occurring within these fields.

Victims often face significant obstacles when trying to speak out. Fear of retaliation, a lack of institutional support, and societal norms that perpetuate predatory behavior all contribute to an environment where victims are silenced, offenders are protected, and misconduct goes unaddressed.

In their call for change, the authors emphasize the need for individuals, institutions, and policies to take a stand. They advocate for the implementation of advanced reporting systems, such as Callisto, and a revision of codes of conduct. The scientific and academic communities must unite against harassment and discrimination.

is where employment attorneys play a crucial role. With proven track records in handling discrimination and harassment cases, these attorneys provide invaluable support to individuals who have experienced misconduct in the workplace. This support is especially vital in science and academia, where victims often feel isolated or unheard.

An effective employment attorney can be a lifeline for victims. They are familiar with complex employment laws and can offer informed guidance on how to proceed with complaints. By advocating for victims, employment attorneys work tirelessly to hold offenders accountable. Their assistance may include evidence collection and representation during trials, ensuring that victims have a voice and seeking justice on their behalf.

Furthermore, employment attorneys can collaborate with institutions to develop practices and policies intended to prevent harassment and discrimination. They can provide essential advice on creating effective reporting systems, establishing mandatory education and training programs, and drafting codes of conduct that comply with legal standards.

As emphasized by the Scientific American article, systemic change is crucial to addressing these issues. Employment attorneys not only support victims on an individual level but also help push for much-needed institutional and policy reforms.

In a world that urgently needs to evolve, employment attorneys are at the forefront, advocating for safer, more inclusive, and equitable environments in science and academia. For victims of harassment and discrimination, an employment attorney can serve as a powerful advocate—a beacon of justice in the midst of challenges.

Posted on

High Price Extracted for Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Retaliation

Helping Employees Recover and Enforcing Employment Laws Helmer Friedman LLP.

A jury awarded a St. Louis County police officer nearly $20 million in a sexual orientation discrimination case. The plaintiff, Sergeant Keith Wildhaber, alleged that the police department repeatedly passed him over for promotions due to his sexual orientation and retaliated against him for filing a discrimination complaint.

The Case:

Wildhaber claimed that over a six-year period, he was denied 23 promotions. With more than 15 years of experience, a clean record, and strong performance reviews, he consistently ranked among the top candidates for promotions.

Additionally, Wildhaber asserted that a member of the Board of Police Commissioners told him he would need to “tone down [his] gayness” if he wanted to be promoted to lieutenant. This board member denied that the conversation ever occurred.

Wildhaber filed a discrimination complaint in April 2016. Shortly after filing the complaint, the department transferred him from a day shift at a precinct close to his home to an overnight shift at a precinct 27 miles away. Consequently, he filed a second complaint that included a charge of retaliation.

In the lawsuit, Wildhaber claimed that the department denied him promotions because his behavior and presentation did not conform to stereotypical ideas of how a male should behave. He further argued that the transfer to the night shift in a distant precinct was retaliation for filing a discrimination complaint. The St. Louis County Police Chief contended that Wildhaber’s sexual orientation was not a factor in the department’s decisions regarding his promotions. During the trial, Wildhaber’s attorneys called witnesses who described a pattern of homophobia within the police department.

The Verdict:

On the sexual orientation discrimination claim, the jury found in favor of Wildhaber and awarded him:

  • $1,980,000 in actual damages
  • $10,000,000 in punitive damages

On the retaliation claim, the jury also found in favor of Wildhaber and awarded him:

  • $990,000 in actual damages
  • $7,000,000 in punitive damages

After the verdict, the jury foreperson stated that the jury wanted their decision to “send a message” that “[i]f you discriminate, you are going to pay a big price.” The $17 million in punitive damages is significant and may be subject to an appeal.

Sexual Orientation Discrimination as Sex Discrimination under Title VII

Although this is a state case, it represents the ongoing discussion about whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related state laws prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Title VII states that it is an “unlawful employment practice for an employer … to discriminate against any individual with respect to [their] compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

The Supreme Court established that Title VII includes a prohibition on discrimination based on nonconformity to stereotypes of one’s assigned sex in its 1989 decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. The Court stated, “we are beyond the day when an employer could evaluate employees by assuming or insisting that they matched the stereotype associated with their group.” (490 U.S. 228, 1989).

As the Sixth Circuit explained in Smith v. City of Salem, “an employer who discriminates against women because, for instance, they do not wear dresses or makeup, is engaging in sex discrimination because the discrimination would not occur but for the victim’s sex” (378 F.3d 566, 574, 2004). This reasoning can apply to individuals in the LGBTQ community since discrimination based on nonconformity to stereotypical, heterosexual norms is inherently linked to a person’s sex.

On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII’s protections extend to the LGBTQ community.

Retaliation is Prohibited under Title VII

Under Title VII, it is illegal for an employer to take adverse actions against an employee because that employee engaged in a protected activity. Protected activities include filing a complaint or opposing unlawful employment practices as outlined in Title VII.

If you believe you have been discriminated against or retaliated against due to your sexual orientation, consider the following questions:

  • Were you treated unfavorably despite good performance at work?
  • Were individuals of different sexual orientations or gender identities favored for promotions compared to you?
  • Does your gender identity or sexual orientation deviate from societal stereotypes of your assigned sex?
  • Did you report mistreatment by your employer or file a lawsuit against them, after which you experienced further discrimination or unfavorable treatment?
Posted on

Standing Up Against Workplace Discrimination: The Role of the Americans With Disabilities Act

ADA protects employees from discrimination due to injuries outside of work.

It is crucial to recognize that an employee who suffers an injury outside of work should not be deprived of the support they need from their employer. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates reasonable accommodations, regardless of the injury’s origin. A recent case brings this important issue to light.

Sam’s East, Inc., along with Walmart Inc., operating under the Sam’s Club name, is currently facing a lawsuit for alleged disability discrimination. This situation arose after an employee experienced significant health challenges—such as post-concussion syndrome, upper back pain, muscle spasms, and chronic lower back pain—following a car accident. The employee reached out for minor, temporary adjustments to her job duties, hoping to continue contributing to her workplace.

Regrettably, after just one shift, she was informed that accommodating her needs would not be possible. Instead, the suggestion was made for her to take additional leave until she could return without any restrictions. Despite providing an expected recovery date, the employee faced a heart-wrenching dismissal, firmly told that the company would not accommodate injuries sustained outside the workplace. This case, now in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, underscores the potential violation of both federal law and the dignity of the employee involved.

This distressing scenario serves as a poignant reminder of the discrimination that many individuals with disabilities continue to encounter in their work environments. The ADA clearly stipulates that reasonable accommodations must be provided, irrespective of the injury’s source. Companies like Sam’s Club have a profound responsibility to support employees facing hardships, ensuring they can return to work with the necessary adjustments in place. Just because an injury arises outside of work does not lessen the employer’s obligation to care for their employees’ well-being.

Given these challenges, it becomes increasingly important to seek the support of an experienced attorney who can advocate for your rights during such trying times. Standing up against unjust treatment is not just important, it’s empowering, not just for individual circumstances but for wider societal change. When people take legal action against discrimination, they help build a future where similar injustices are less likely to occur.

As district director Darrell Graham poignantly noted, “Employees with disabilities have a right to work… [and the] EEOC is committed to enforcing the ADA and ensuring that Americans with disabilities have equal access to employment.” By holding companies accountable, we can work together to uphold these rights and foster environments where everyone is supported and valued.

Posted on

A Guide to Class Action Lawsuits

Class action lawsuits, powerful tool to hold these organizations accountable while empowering individuals to seek justice collectively.

When large corporations or entities act negligently, unfairly, or unlawfully, their actions can harm not just one individual but entire groups of people. For consumers, standing up to such powerful organizations can feel daunting. This is where class action lawsuits come in—a powerful tool to hold these organizations accountable while empowering individuals to seek justice collectively.

This guide will walk you through what a class action lawsuit is, how to file one, and highlight some major recently settled cases.

What is a Class Action Lawsuit?

A class action lawsuit allows one or several individuals, known as the lead plaintiffs, to sue on behalf of a larger group that has been similarly affected. This is particularly useful when the damages suffered by individuals are relatively small, making it impractical to pursue legal action alone. By filing as a group, plaintiffs can streamline legal procedures, reduce costs, and level the playing field against well-funded corporations.

Class action lawsuits cover a broad range of cases, including but not limited to:

  • Defective products
  • Consumer fraud
  • Employment disputes
  • Environmental threats
  • Data privacy and security breaches

They serve to not only secure compensation for the affected parties but also compel organizations to adopt better practices, fostering long-term accountability.

How to File a Class Action Lawsuit

If you believe you are part of a group that has been wronged, here’s a step-by-step guide to filing a class action lawsuit.

1. Identify Common Grievance

The first step is determining whether numerous people have been affected in a similar way. Class action lawsuits typically require that the claims of the group (the “class”) share common legal and factual issues.

2. Seek Legal Counsel

Hiring an experienced attorney is essential. Class action lawsuits are complex, involving intricate legal procedures and extensive documentation. A skilled attorney can assess the validity of your claim, identify others affected, and guide you through the process.

3. File the Case

Once an attorney identifies sufficient grounds for the case, they will file a motion in court to establish the lawsuit as a class action. This process, known as “certification,” ensures the court recognizes the group and specifies who qualifies as class members.

4. Notify Potential Class Members

If the court certifies the lawsuit, affected individuals will be notified, allowing them to choose whether they want to participate. Those who agree will be represented as part of the class in court proceedings.

5. Litigation or Settlement

The lawsuit may proceed to trial, although most class actions are resolved through negotiated settlements. Settlements typically involve monetary compensation, changes to company policies, or both.

Examples of Recently Settled Class Action Lawsuits

To better understand the impact of class actions, here are three notable recent cases that delivered justice to affected groups.

1. The Pet Food Recall Lawsuit ($24 Million Settlement)

Helmer Friedman LLP filed a class action suit against Menu Foods, Nutro Products, Inc., and PETCO after their pet food products were linked to severe kidney damage and even deaths in pets. Thousands of distraught pet owners came forward, resulting in a $24 million settlement. This case simultaneously compensated victims and drew attention to safety protocols within pet food manufacturing.

2. Unlawful Payroll Deductions by U.S. Remodelers ($1.5 Million Settlement)

California-based sales associates of U.S. Remodelers filed a class action lawsuit over unauthorized paycheck deductions. These deductions included fees for permits and penalties for measurement errors made during their work. After litigation, the company agreed to a $1.5 million settlement, ensuring employees were reimbursed and preventing future unlawful deductions.

3. Lemonade Insurance Data Breach ($4.9 Million Settlement)

Insurance provider Lemonade, Inc. faced scrutiny for improperly sharing customers’ sensitive personal and medical data with third parties, including platforms such as Facebook, TikTok, and Snapchat. Affected users came together in a class action lawsuit, resulting in a $4.9 million settlement and a wake-up call for the insurance industry to prioritize data privacy.

These cases underscore the real-world impact class actions can have—not only in compensating victims but also in reforming unethical practices.

Why Class Action Lawsuits Matter

For individual consumers, taking legal action against large entities is often expensive and overwhelming. Corporations know this and may prefer to settle disputes quietly, case by case, rather than face the public scrutiny of a widespread issue.

Class action lawsuits balance the scales of justice. They grant consumers collective power to challenge unlawful or negligent behavior, influence positive change within industries, and ensure accountability for wrongful acts.

Important Disclaimer: Any legal process—especially one as complex as a class action lawsuit—requires professional guidance. If you believe you’ve been harmed by the actions of a company, consult with an experienced attorney with a proven record of successful class actions cases.

Take Action

Class action lawsuits demonstrate that justice is possible, even against powerful corporations. The team at Helmer Friedman LLP is committed to protecting the rights of consumers, employees, and patients. If you’ve been affected by unsafe products, unfair practices, or data breaches, our experienced attorneys can help you explore your options.

Contact us for a free consultation today and take the first step toward justice. Together, we can hold negligent companies accountable.

Filing a class action lawsuit isn’t just about compensation—it’s about creating lasting change. Stand up, speak out, and demand accountability.

Posted on

Northern Virginia Surgery Center Settles Disability and Age Discrimination Lawsuit for $50,000

Age discrimination and harassment are illegal.

A nonprofit organization has reached a settlement in a federal lawsuit that raised serious concerns about the treatment of an older employee who was on medical leave. The case involved a 52-year-old radiologic technician who, after undergoing carpal tunnel surgery, requested an extension of her leave to continue her recovery. Unfortunately, instead of supporting her during this challenging time, Northern Virginia Surgery Center, LLC (NVSC) terminated her employment and replaced her with two younger employees, aged 24 and 35.

This lawsuit serves as a vital reminder of the need to protect the rights of older workers, especially when they are navigating medical challenges that require support and understanding from their employers.

 

This situation highlights a painful reality faced by many in the workforce — that discrimination based on age can occur even in the face of legitimate medical needs. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is in place to protect individuals aged 40 and older from such unfair treatment, while the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates that employers accommodate employees with disabilities whenever possible.

The lawsuit (EEOC v. Northern Virginia Surgery Center, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-1721) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This step was taken after unsuccessful attempts to settle the matter amicably before litigation.

In a commendable move towards healing and accountability, NVSC has agreed to a settlement of $50,000 and committed to implementing significant changes to better address discrimination claims in the future. Beyond the financial compensation for the employee affected, a two-year consent decree will require the company to revise its policies under the ADEA and ADA, provide essential training to management, educate employees about these important laws, and ensure that any complaints related to age or disability discrimination are reported to the EEOC.

Attorney Debra M. Lawrence expressed hope and relief following the resolution, stating, “This agreement will provide much-needed relief to the injured party and ensure that NVSC’s employees will have access to reasonable accommodations, such as medical leave, in the future.”

Mindy Weinstein, director of the EEOC’s Washington Field Office, underscored the importance of this case, noting, “This lawsuit serves as a vital reminder of the need to protect the rights of older workers, especially when they are navigating medical challenges that require support and understanding from their employers.”

It is important to note that age discrimination is a complex issue that may require legal intervention. If you or someone you know has been a victim of age discrimination, consider seeking legal advice from an experienced employment lawyer of Helmer Friedman LLP Age Discrimination Lawyers in Los Angeles. Together, we can help ensure that no one loses their job due to age.

Posted on

The Shadow Side of Corporate Culture at Fox: Addressing Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment causes long term damage to the victims psyche.

Introduction

Corporate culture can define the success—or failure—of any business. It shapes how employees interact, influences decisions, and reflects a company’s values to the world. When that culture harbors secrecy, discrimination, or tolerance of misconduct, it can lead to devastating consequences for individuals and organizations alike.

Recent controversies surrounding Fox have brought its corporate culture into sharp focus, particularly regarding its history of sexual harassment. Today, we will explore the disconnect between Fox’s public image and the internal culture that has led to repeated high-profile cases of misconduct.

For those who have endured workplace harassment, this serves as a reminder that accountability, transparency, and reform are not just ideals but necessities. If you’ve experienced similar issues in your workplace, remember—no company is above the law.

Defining Corporate Culture

Corporate culture refers to the shared values, norms, and practices that guide how employees interact and collaborate within an organization. It’s embedded in everything from leadership style to workplace policies. A healthy corporate culture fosters respect, creativity, and accountability. On the other hand, a toxic culture breeds fear, misconduct, and complacency.

At its core, corporate culture isn’t just about glossy mission statements or the perks offered to staff. It’s about real, day-to-day experiences that shape employees’ perceptions of their workplace—a truth that Fox’s controversies bring into sharp relief.

The Image Fox Projects

Fox has long portrayed itself as a trailblazing media empire to the outside world. With its internal spotlight awards and a global reputation, the company has attracted top-tier talent and created opportunities in the entertainment and media worlds.

Internally, Fox promises a dynamic, inclusive, and fiercely competitive environment. For prospective employees, it pitches itself as an employer of choice—an arena where innovation and hard work are richly rewarded.

However, as we explore more deeply, the surface-level promises of such corporate culture often clash with the troubling reality that employees, especially women, have faced behind closed doors.

The Shadow Side of Fox’s Corporate Culture

Despite the image of success, stories from within Fox expose a corporate culture plagued by sexual harassment, discrimination, and a lack of accountability. Over the years, high-profile cases have painted a picture of unchecked power and toxic work environments.

A History of Allegations and Settlements

Below are some documented cases that highlight recurring patterns of harassment and legal action against Fox and its employees.

  1. Roger Ailes founded Fox News and served as its chairman and CEO. He played a significant role in shaping conservative media.
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: July 6, 2016
  • Award: Gretchen Carlson received a $20 million settlement after accusing then-CEO Roger Ailes of sexual harassment. This case became a turning point, exposing a long-standing culture of abuse within the organization.
  1. Bill O’Reilly was a prominent figure at Fox News, where he hosted the news commentary program The O’Reilly Factor from 1996 until 2017. For many years, The O’Reilly Factor was one of the highest-rated cable news shows, making O’Reilly a significant influence in conservative media.
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: Settlements came to light in 2017
  • Award: Over $45 million were paid across multiple settlements after allegations surfaced against the former prime-time anchor.
  1. Jamie Horowitz was a prominent executive at Fox Sports, serving as National Networks’s President. He oversaw programming and digital news operations for Fox Sports, including channels FS1 and FS22. Horowitz was known for shifting the focus of Fox Sports programming towards talk personalities and away from traditional newsgathering.
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: July 2017
  • Award: Settlement details remain undisclosed, but allegations of sexual misconduct led to his departure from the network.
  1. Charles Payne is a Fox Business Network (FBN) financial journalist and television personality. He joined Fox News Media as a contributor in 2007 and currently hosts the show “Making Money with Charles Payne.”
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: July 2017
  • Award: Like Horowitz, Payne’s settlement details were not disclosed, though harassment allegations resulted in widespread internal criticism.
  1. Skip Bayless was a prominent sports commentator at Fox Sports, where he co-hosted the show “Skip and Shannon: Undisputed” on Fox Sports 1 (FS1) from September 2016 until August 2024.
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: January 6, 2025 (ongoing) The suit alleges Bayless offered the plaintiff $1.5 million to have sex with him and that an FS1 exec grabbed her buttocks at a party.
  • Award: Still pending, this lawsuit further illustrates the cycle of accusations that continues to haunt Fox’s legacy.
  1. Charlie Dixon is the Executive Vice President of Content at Fox Sports 1 (FS1). He joined Fox Sports in July 2015 and oversees all content and production on the channel.
  • Date Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed: January 6, 2025 (ongoing) The lawsuit accuses Dixon of grabbing her buttocks at a bar and elevating Joy Taylor thanks to their relationship; the complaint accuses Fox of ignoring multiple complaints she lodged with HR over the years.
  • Award: Still pending, this lawsuit further illustrates the cycle of accusations that continues to haunt Fox’s legacy.

Over the years, these cases reveal a disturbing pattern of allegations, payouts, and secrecy—paving the way for a permissive environment where harassers faced little accountability.

Impact on Employees

Behind these legal battles lie real human costs. Employees who remain at Fox following incidents of harassment often report feeling unheard, unprotected, and demoralized.

Victims of harassment face stigmas that damage their confidence, health, and professional growth. For many women at Fox, silence seemed like the only option to maintain their careers. Those who spoke out, like Gretchen Carlson, risked not only their jobs but also their reputations.

This culture of fear and inaction harms more than individual employees—it weakens teams, stifles creativity, and erodes trust throughout the organization.

Fox’s Response and Reforms

To its credit, Fox has acknowledged some of its corporate failings and introduced measures aimed at fixing them. These include launching anonymous reporting tools, hiring external consultants to assess workplace culture, and holding leadership training addressing harassment.

But critics argue these reforms fall short of addressing the root causes of issues at Fox. Real accountability requires transparent communication, thorough investigations, and public disclosures about how the company handles such complaints. It’s a long road from acknowledging problems to truly shifting an entrenched corporate mindset.

Lessons for the Future

The challenges faced by Fox aren’t unique. Companies across industries must consider the long-term harm caused by toxic workplace cultures. However, Fox’s story provides a stark lesson for leaders in any organization:

  • A company’s corporate culture must align with its public image. Misalignment breeds distrust and risks credibility.
  • Harassment stems not simply from individual bad actors but from systems that enable their behavior.
  • Accountability and timely action are critical in fostering a safe and effective workplace.

For Fox, the future depends on its ability to address these issues openly. Without significant shifts, its culture risks dragging the larger organization into further controversies.

Final Thoughts

The Fox revelations serve as both a wake-up call and a rallying cry for broader workplace accountability. Sexual harassment isn’t just an HR issue—it’s a systemic failure that hampers businesses’ ability to thrive.

If you or someone you know has faced harassment at the workplace, know that there are paths to take. Contact an experienced employment attorney and hold corporations accountable for creating safe and fair work environments. Speaking up about harassment isn’t just about personal justice—it’s about ensuring that nobody else has to endure the same abuse.

Corporate culture reflects leadership and values in action. The question remains—how will organizations like Fox use this opportunity to redefine theirs?