Employment Lawyer Blog

Fernando Flores, a former bodyguard for Britney Spears, is suing the 29-year old pop princess for sexual harassment.

The former police officer wants $10 million in damages. He claims that, during his half a year stint as one of Spear's bodyguards, the singer made "repeated, unwanted sexual advances." Flores' lawsuit also alleges that Spears spent a lot of time under the influence of drugs, like Narcon, Ritalin, and other methamphetamines.

One blurb from the lawsuit is particularly telling: "Spears was generally personally unkempt... [she] had obnoxious personal habits, such as chain smoking cigarettes, which made her smell continuously of stale tobacco. She broke wind or picked her nose... unapologetically before [Flores] and others, and she was constantly and gratuitously loud and profane in her speech."

According to TMZ.com, "Fernando Flores claims Britney made repeated unwanted sexual advances towards him by exposing herself in front of him in her home."

Flores described a scene in which Spears - who was wearing a skimpy white lace outfit - intentionally dropped her cigarette lighter, bent over to pick it up, and "thereby exposed her uncovered genitals to (Flores) causing him shock and disgust."

Another time, naked Britney summoned the bodyguard to her room to fetch her some bottles of 7UP. The third time she exposed herself, Britney allegedly taunted Flores, saying: "You know you liked it." Lastly, the suit also claimed that "in addition to exposing herself...Spears engaged in numerous sex acts in front of (Flores)."

The bodyguard finally quit his position after the pop princess allegedly exposed herself to him.

Unsurprisingly, Spears's attorneys have been quick to denounce Flores' allegations as totally untrue. But this has not stopped the blogosphere from going wild. Radar Online, for instance, seemed to revel in the details of Ms. Spears's alleged hygiene problems, and quoted the lawsuit extensively, including this blurb: "she did not bathe for days on end, did not use deodorant, did not brush her teeth, did not fix her hair, did not wear shoes or socks."

So did Spears "parade naked in front of [Flores] and often beckon him into her bedroom for sex"? Or didn't she?

Spears's history of odd behavior - remember a few years ago when she shaved her head seemingly for no reason? - no doubt prompted many readers to buy into some or all of Flores' allegations.

This is an important lesson: past perceptions can radically shape how we view future allegations. In this case, Flores' allegations seem to "rhyme" with Spears's tabloid worthy past behavior.

If you've experienced sexual harassment, racial discrimination, retaliation, or other some other form of workplace mistreatment, you might want to note any relevant historical behavior. If a supervisor (or other person) who mistreated you has a history of breaking the law, or at least making inept, stupid, or even hostile behavioral choices, this can help you.

For instance, say you served as an executive assistant for six months, and your boss has been sexually harassing you. If other past assistants can support the thrust of your argument -- by testifying that they, too, experienced harassment or at least saw signs that indicated that the boss was more than capable of violating workplace conduct rules -- then you may enjoy extra leverage to get compensation and hold the wrongdoer to account.

To approach your case in a systematic, strategic way, we invite you to connect with the powerful, experienced team at Joseph & Kirschenbaum at 866-348-7394 or www.jhllp.com.

Deshon Marman, a football player for the University of New Mexico, recently boarded a U.S. Airways flight out of San Francisco, probably expecting a mundane trip. But a surprising series of turns placed Marman at the center of a provocative racial discrimination case...

According to an Associated Press report, Marman had been wearing "saggy pants." Airline officials asked him to pull up his pants, since he allegedly was "exposing a body part." Marman refused, repeatedly. Ultimately, the U.S. Airways captain ordered Marman to leave the flight. He refused. The airline called the authorities. Marman was arrested and charged with "trespassing, battery of a police officer and obstruction." Prosecutors later dropped the charges.

That could easily have been the end of the story, in which case we probably would not be blogging about it. However, Marman wanted revenge. His lawyers have now accused U.S. Airways of racial discrimination: an accusation that's stirred up fire and brimstone in the blogosphere. Consider these anonymous reader comments from www.wowt.com:

• "Debbie" wrote: "there should be a law enforcing these little thugs to pull up their pants. I am sick of the indecent exposure when out with my family."

• "Andy" said: "there is plenty of white thug wannabes running around wearing saggy pants. No racial discrimination there."

• "I Am Black, Too" wrote: "anything to get a few bucks from the airlines!!!"

It may be possible to find supportive comments (from Marman's perspective) online. But the general point here is that, when we read stories about racial discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, and workplace mistreatment, we tend to have very visceral reactions. We "know in our guts" what's just and what's not. We also enjoy freely dispensing this wisdom.

Our impressions about the case might be right. Or they might not be. And this can lead us into dangerous territory. If we guess "right" about a situation, no harm done.

But if we guess wrong -- leap to the wrong judgment and become deaf and blind to evidence to the contrary -- the consequences can be surprisingly unpleasant.

Here's an example of how this kind of "I already know the truth, so don't confuse me with facts" thinking can create problems. Let's say your boss harasses you. You complain. But the boss cleverly responds by concocting a story that makes you sound like a whiner, embellisher, or even flat out liar. The facts don't support this, obviously. But if someone in H.R. buys into the boss's argument and then refuses to hear your counterargument ("I already know the truth, so don't confuse me with facts!"), you may hesitate to seek a quick and just resolution to your problem and have trouble getting the behavior to stop.

All of this is to say that you need to protect yourself by getting smart, ethical representation as quickly as possible to preserve your rights, reputation, and peace of mind. Set up a free consultation with the team at Joseph & Kirschenbaum by visiting www.jhllp.com or by calling us at 866-348-7394.

A once seemingly compelling sexual harassment and assault case against former International Monetary Fund (IMF) head Dominique Strauss-Kahn, fell apart last week when the 32-year-old Guinean maid who claimed that the 62-year-old scion assaulted her, lost credibility as a witness. Apparently, the validity of many of the statements she made about what happened after the alleged attack (among other issues) is highly questionable. In the wake of the maid's damaged credibility, the prosecution's case crumbled. Mr. Strauss-Kahn was released from house arrest, and pundits are currently unsure about how (or even if) legal action will now be pursued.

As if the unexpected "flameout" wasn't story enough, Strauss-Kahn's accuser is now suing the New York Post and five reporters for libel for insinuating that she had worked as a prostitute. The maid filed the suit on Tuesday at a state Supreme Court in the Bronx. She claims that Post reporters "falsely, maliciously and with reckless regard for the truth stated as a fact that the plaintiff is a 'prostitute' 'hooker' 'working girl' and/or 'routinely traded sex for money with male guests' of the Sofitel Hotel located in Manhattan."

A Post spokesperson responded to the suit, saying that the paper stood by its reporting. The Post claims that insiders from Strauss-Kahn's defense team revealed that the maid had received "extraordinary tips" from male patrons of the hotel and had received expenses "paid for by men not related to her." So far, prosecutors and police have not found evidence to support allegations that the maid engaged in prostitution.

And so, the sordid tale continues. We can learn two lessons from all of this:

1. Seemingly simple (if newsworthy) cases of racial discrimination, sexual harassment, wage and hour violations, etc. can evolve into labyrinthine complications as the result of thorough research and analysis.

2. Witnesses, defendants and victims often find themselves under intense pressure and can make horrific judgments that can compound the problems and lead to vast legal (and other) trouble.

The moral is that, if you or someone you care about has been subjected to sexual harassment, workplace mistreatment, or retaliation, the sooner you contact a reputable New York employment law firm (such as Joseph & Kirschenbaum), the faster you will be able to understand your options and chart a course to get the respect you deserve, the compensation you need, and the stability in your life you crave, under guidance from seasoned professionals.

Connect with the JHLLP team by calling 866-348-7394, or learn more about the firm's background, history, and philosophy at www.jhllp.com.

Bravo's Real Housewives of New York City is a crucible of un-pretty human emotions and interactions. And now one of the stars of the cast, Cindy Barshop, has been hit with a racial discrimination lawsuit. Barshop is an entrepreneur who owns Completely Bare spas. Altovise Collier, one of her employees (and also a costar on Real Housewives), has leveled accusations that "she was tormented [at work] and then wrongfully terminated because she is black."

Reality TV Magazine summarized the situation this way: "Collier says that Barshop underpaid her, only giving her half the $700 a week salary and paying her in cash. Without a paystub, Altovise claims that she was unable to lease or rent an apartment, leaving her to rely on friends who let her sleep on their couches." Collier also claimed that the employees at Completely Bare joked that she had been hired simply to "inject some color" into the staff and was essentially hazed "like I was in some sort of sorority." Collier approached Barshop about the alleged mistreatment; one week later, she was fired. The mom of two has so far denied Ms. Collier's claims and insists that she fired the aesthetician "because of the quality of her work."

As is often the case in heated battles over allegations of sexual harassment, racial discrimination, wage and hour violations, and retaliation, this debate boils down to a "he said, she said" type argument. If you or a coworker or a family member has been mistreated at work - whether you work at a fancy restaurant, beauty parlor, or machining shop - the more evidence you can collect and protect, the better.

For instance, say someone sent you a harassing email: print out that email and store it in a safe place - like your home safe deposit box. Or, say a coworker made harassing comments to you: write down exactly what that person said, including the context, location, etc. The longer you wait to record eyewitness testimony or your own recollections of an event, the more difficult it may be to use that evidence to leverage compensation and justice.

It may also behoove you to connect with an experienced employment lawyer. The team at Joseph & Kirschenbaum, LLP can provide a free and confidential case evaluation. Call the firm toll free at 866-348-7394, or learn more about your potential options at www.jhllp.com.