Is it really inappropriate..?

Discuss your favorite athlete, talk about current sporting news, physical fitness, martial arts, and anything else related to athletics here.
User avatar
-84
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#11

Post by -84 »

Is she wrong for going into the lockerroom? If she went in there before schedule? Yes.
Was it on purpose? No.

Does she deserve this treatment? NO.

Does justifing make it better? NO.
Image

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
AYHJA
392
Posts: 37989
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#12

Post by AYHJA »

Not so much as if its right or wrong Homez, just whether or not its that big of a deal that's all...I mean, everyone has a right to do their job, but I mean...Jusayin', what did she expect..?

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
shining2001uk
Munky
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 4:34 pm

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#13

Post by shining2001uk »

5829 is right on the money.
nobody deserves it. but if you put yourself in a situations of risk something is likely to happen.
also, if you unwittingly find yourself in this situation then i have more sympathy but I suspect she was not that naive.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
5829
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 pm
Location: The Village
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#14

Post by 5829 »

I never tried to justify it. But you can not ignore the reality of the situation.

It is a big deal in the sense that it happened and should be made public to help prevent it happening again. However, I also think that she knew what was going to happen, such as what was happening before she went to the locker room, so it could have been avoided. As shining2001uk says, I don't think that she was that naive.

What I would like to see is an openly gay male (a good looking one) go into the locker room for interviews and see how they react. Especially if the interviewer starts making comments about them.



As far as the legal aspects, here are a couple of articles I found.

http://www.nwbusinesslawgroup.com/blog/ ... gal-sense/

(links within the article not reproduced here)

Did NY Jets Sexually Harass Reporter Ines Sainz in a Legal Sense?

by Eric Helmy, Managing Partner, NW Business Law Group

Summary: Whatever the social implications of the New York Jets‘ treatment of female sideline reporter Ines Sainz, the incident probably would not have qualified as “sexual harassment” in a legally actionable sense vs. the Jets, although she might have a viable claim against her employer (if subject to jurisdiction of US court) where employer markets her as a sex object and sends her, provocatively dressed, into a locker room full of naked men (under Oregon law, which would apply if the Jets played in Portland instead of NY). Actionable or not, the Jets’ actions were contemptible and entirely consistent with what one would expect from that franchise given its recent shenanigans.

In the interests of full disclosure, let me note first off that I am a fan of the New England Patriots and have never had any love for the New York Jets. With that bit out of the way, the controversy involving the New York Jets’ reported treatment of female reporter Ines Sainz presents a teaching moment about sexual harassment from a legal standpoint.

For those of you lost in the wilderness for the last 3 days, Ms. Sainz is a reporter for the Mexican broadcasting company TV Azteca. A quick Google search of her name reveals several provocative images, sprinkled among taglines including “World’s Hottest Female Sports Reporters”, “Hottest sports reporter in Mexico,” etc. You get the picture.

According to ESPN, TV Azteca markets Ms. Sainz both as a reporter and a model, and the company’s website features provocative images of her. TV Azeteca’s female reporters have previously worn wedding gowns at Super Bowl press days in proposal to Patriots’ QB Tom Brady, and Ms. Sainz has previously held biceps-measurment contests for NFL players and allowed herself to be carried off-field on players’ shoulders.

After Monday night’s 1-point beatdown (you had to have seen the highlights to understand) of they Jets at the hands of Ray Lewis and the Baltimore Ravens, Ms. Sainz reportedly entered the Jets’ locker room, featuring football players in various states of undress, to interview Mark Sanchez, the Jets’ quarterback. At that point, Jets’ staff started throwing footballs in the general direction of Ms. Sainz, in order to give players a pretext to get close to her. This reportedly produced an “uncomfortable” situation of sufficient note as to warrant an internal investigation.

There has since been much talk about whether the Jets had subjected Ms. Sainz to “sexual harassment.” NBC’s “Today” show produced a rather scattered piece this morning touching on many dimensions of the story. While the Jets/Sainz episode strikes chords of social equality, feminism, gender roles, and political correctness, we will leave those topics to their respective experts. We would like to address only the legal merits of the term “sexual harassment” as it applies to this story. More properly, as it would apply under the laws of the Great State of Oregon.

“Sexual Harassment” may have all sorts of colloquial connotations, but at law it is a term of art. Under Oregon law, the Bureau of Labor and Industries must find several factors in order to hold an employer liable for sexual harassment:

(1) The respondent [alleged wrongdoer] is an employer as defined by statute;

(2) The complainant was employed by the respondent;

(3) The complainant is a member of a protected class (sex);

(4) The respondent or the respondent’s agent, supervisory employee, or nonemployee made unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, directed at the complainant because of the complainant’s sex;

(5) The conduct unreasonably interfered with the complainant’s work performance or created an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment, or submission to the conduct was made an explicit or implicit term or condition of employment;

(6) The respondent knew or should have known of the conduct; and

(7) The complainant was harmed by the conduct [Source: Oregon State Bar]

If the NY Jets were, say, the Portland Jets instead but the facts were otherwise the same, could Ms. Sainz successfully bring a civil claim for “sexual harassment” against them? That is unlikely, because of element #2: The complainant must have been employed by the respondent. Ms. Sainz did not work for the Jets; she worked for TV Azteca. Summary Judgment granted in favor of the Jets.

The more interesting question is whether she could prevail in a sexual harassment suit against her own employer due to the conducts of Jets players and staff. Note that the regulations require that “the respondent or the respondent’s agent, supervisory employee, or NONEMPLOYEE made unwelcome sexual advances.” Arguably, by marketing Ms. Sainz as a sex object and sending her, in alleged provocative dress, into a locker room full of scantily-clad professional football players, TV Azeteca engaged in conduct that would have been prohibited under Oregon law.

At the end of the day, such legal questions are academic. Ms Sainz appears to be a Mexican National and TV Azteca is a Mexican company. A US Court may not be able to claim jurisdiction.

So what do we make about the Jets’ alleged behavior? Legally, it’s almost certainly much ado about nothing. So what’s left? Questions of character, class, respect, professionalism, and image. By those measures, the Jets’ treatment of Ms. Sainz showed a level of class and sophistication one might expect from that organization. These Jets, having won their lone championship sometime before the last ice age, recently declared themselves the next Super Bowl Champions and proceeded to get lit up in their own house, by the very Baltimore defense they maligned, on national TV during the first game of the season.

Here’s rooting for the Patriots this weekend vs. the Jets.

- EH

This blog entry was published by attorney Eric Helmy, a local Oregon business lawyer on Thursday, September 16th, 2010 at 1:09 am and is filed under the category Business Law, Employment Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the NW Business Law Firm RSS feed. Don't forget to bookmark this site!




http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/op ... t-20100921

The Law of the Locker Room in Ines Sainz Case

Updated: Tuesday, 21 Sep 2010, 2:34 PM CDT
Published : Tuesday, 14 Sep 2010, 12:22 PM CDT

By Karen Conti, Contributing Legal Analyst, FOX Chicago News

Chicago - The media coverage of the Inez Sainz reporter-in-the-locker room-incident leads me to believe that most people don’t understand the legalities of sexual harassment.

Sainz, a reporter and presumably an employee of Mexico’s TV Azteca, entered the New York Jets locker room and was apparently bombarded with sexual comments by football players, employees of the New York Jets. Believe it or not, the law does not prohibit that conduct.

For example, if I walk down the street and a construction worker hollers, “Nice [whatever]!”, that may be offensive, but it is not actionable. Why not? Sexual harassment can be the subject of a lawsuit or human rights/Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claim only in certain contexts such as employment and public housing. So, let’s say that I am employed by the same construction company as my crude admirers. If I am offended by their comments, I would report the conduct to management and, if management does not correct it, I have a complaint.

Sainz' only possible sexual harassment suit is against her employer (if, for the sake of argument, the law of the United States applies.) Suppose that, over a period of time, Sainz received sexual comments from athletes in locker rooms. She tells her boss, “You are putting me a hostile work environment; don’t put me there again.” If her boss tells her to tough it out, then she could arguably file an EEOC claim against her management for exposing her to that harassment.

Who has the best harassment case? In my mind, it is the players who are subject to the presence of female reporters in the locker room. Imagine what a woman would do if part of her job was to speak -- while partially clothed -- to someone with a pen and the power to describe what he sees! Hostile work environment is too mild a description. But, surely the players have signed away the right to bring such a suit in their multi-million dollar contracts. Some clever lawyer would have seen to that.


http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/39239362/ns/sports-nfl/
Nudes are played out.
Send me a video of you reading out loud so I know you are not dumb and your profile picture is actually you.

Free Rice - feed the world - play for free
National Domestic Violence Hotline - 1-800-799-7233
National Rape, Sexual Assault Hotline - 1-800-656-4673
Love Is Respect - 1-866-331-9474

~~~ accept everything - Believe Whatever - TRUST NOTHING ~~~~

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Never tell all you know...

Disclaimer: The opinions are my own. Nobody else wants them.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
shining2001uk
Munky
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 4:34 pm

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#15

Post by shining2001uk »

very interesting that you cant claim sexual harassment against the perpretrators if they are not employed by the same organisation. thanks for the education.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
AYHJA
392
Posts: 37989
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#16

Post by AYHJA »

5829, always with the great info...

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
-84
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#17

Post by -84 »

Stay classy New York....
Image

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
jdog
Posts: 3318
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:59 pm

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#18

Post by jdog »

When you wear clothes that conform to your skin you are 1) seeking that type of attention and 2) shouldn't be surprised when you get it.
If any links are down, please send me a PM!

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
-84
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#19

Post by -84 »

jdog wrote:When you wear clothes that conform to your skin you are 1) seeking that type of attention and 2) shouldn't be surprised when you get it.
I guess you wear baggy pants and three layers of cloths....

:|
Image

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
jdog
Posts: 3318
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:59 pm

Re: Is it really inappropriate..?

#20

Post by jdog »

-84 wrote:I guess you wear baggy pants and three layers of cloths....

:|
No idea what you are implying or where you are going with that. I do wear loose, comfortable clothing.

If you want to be taken seriously as a professional then you don't wear the clothes that she wore. It's just common sense - something most women lack.
If any links are down, please send me a PM!

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
Post Reply