California woman awarded $500,000 for being spanked by boss
FRESNO, Calif. - a jury awarded $1.7 million Friday to a woman who was spanked in front of her colleagues in what her employer called a camaraderie-building exercise.
The jury of six men and six women found Janet Orlando, 53, was subjected to sexual harassment and sexual battery when whe was paddled on the rear end two years ago at Alarm One Inc., a home security company. The jury said Orlando did not suffer from sexual assault, as she had alleged.
Jurors awarded Orlando $10,000 for economic loss, $40,000 for future medical costs and $450,000 for emotional distress, pain and suffering. They awarded her an additional $1.2 million in punitive damages.
Her lawyer, Nicholas (Butch) Wagner, did not return calls for comment. K. Poncho Baker, a lawyer for Alarm One, said it was excessive.
"I think the jury was so upset at Alarm One that they went overboard," Baker said. "Not to say that what Alarm One did was right but this allows her to manipulate the system."
Orlando quit in 2004, less than a year after she was hired, saying she was humiliated during the dompany's camaraderie-building exercises.
Sales teams were encouraged to compete and the losers were made fun of, forced to eat baby food, required to wear diapers and spanked with a rival campany's yard signs.
Lawyers for the company said Orlando and others took part in the exercise willingly. The company has since abandoned the practice.
During the trial, company lawyer revealed Orlando had sued a previous employer, also claiming she had been sexually harassed.
Hey, if you sign up for the job, things like that are part of the job. She could have refused to participate in the cameradie-building event, could not she?
$40,000 for medical costs? Very realistic. If himroids (spelling) are that expensive to get rid of, there is something seriously flawed with the US medical system, even by US standards.
As for the other incidents, it is part of the corporate culture. I would hate a job like that, so I would not seek employment there. I am simply not suited for that. Why pursue employment in a place that is not suited for you at all?
Where to stop?
The next target: suing schools for handing out grades, both everything above c's and everything below c's. So humilliating. :roll:
In fact kids get teased and bullied because of their grades. The kids themselves did not invent grades. Some kids even are driven to suicide because of the grades they make. So let's sue schools for the humiliation they willingly and knowingly inflict upon kids too!
i disagree with you vautrin. this is sexual harrassment and that activity is degrading to say the least. people will participate in fear of losing their jobs, their living.
the company was wrong. they admitted it when they stopped that rediculous activity. their lucky is was only one women who took them to court and sued them. wearing diapers and paddling butts is unthinkable. that company were morons for doing it and now they have to pay. it's illegal.
__________________ Life is what you make of it. Make it happen.
this is sexual harrassment and that activity is degrading to say the least.
Have you ever been member of a student society? This is nothing, and they don't consider it degrading at all. They call it character building. There is a big difference of opinion here, I must say.
You can't simply assume something is what you think it is for others, because others may perceive it differently.
people will participate in fear of losing their jobs, their living.
So fear to lose their living outweighs any moral and legal considerations for the person in the situation? That would be interesting, as then the whole US Constitution, plus its Ammendments, would be a joke. Would this woman go as far, as to hold that position as well?
the company was wrong. they admitted it when they stopped that rediculous activity.
Nonsense. Remember the woman who "accidentally" spilled hot coffee over her lap, and sued for a few billion dollar and WON?
Apparently it is ridiculous for coffeemakers to assume that people have at least half a brain, and can think of the fact that if the coffee is hot in the cup, that it might be hot outside of the cup as well. So they stopped not printing that the coffee is hot on the cups.
That does not mean that the company was filled with morons. It only meant that the company was not moron-proof.
And apparently, it is ridiculous for a company to assume, that if someone does not agree with something, that that person will speak up (First Ammendment). Which is, in fact one of the founding principles of the US, and most countries of the world.
wearing diapers and paddling butts is unthinkable.
Probably you have never been into a student society. Practices like this are far more common than you think.
Either this woman is complaining for her own lack of assertiveness (and what would she be doing in the security field anyways?), or the US Constitution would be a joke. Take your pick.
Re: California woman awarded $500,000 for being sp
I saw this one being checked out by a Google Spider and had to read it. I laughed at the stupidity of the woman and the company. I think the award was way over the top. She participated and it appears willingly. If she didn't want to do it she could have said so. Then if they fired her because of it then I would agree she could sue. I just have a problem with everyone suing at the drop of a hat. I don't agree with what the company did either. I think they were stupid too.
The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning, and does not stop until you get to the office. (Robert Frost)