Law And More

Bayer & Roundup - Will It Settle?

To many constituencies, ranging from management experts to investors, the leadership at Bayer seems like a Ship of Fools. Meanwhile the stock has been on a sustained downward trajectory. 

Here are more details from The Wall Street Journal.

Less than a year ago Bayer purchased Monsanto, maker of Roundup. Not soon after, in a U.S. courtroom, Roundup was associated with a death from cancer. The verdict, which was reduced, had been $289 million.

More recently there had been a jury verdict of more than $2 billion. There remains 13,400 total plaintiffs. In terms of the stock, Bayer currently is worth less than the $63 billion it had paid for Monsanto. 

The question, as the WSJ, points out is: Will Bayer settle?

Essentially, Bayer is waiting to see how the appeals go - yes, it is appealing all verdicts - in order to get a clear picture of the legalities.

Also, a win could significantly affect its perception of where it stands legally.

There is also the reality that around the world, regulatory agencies find the active ingredient in Roundup - glyphosate - safe. That includes the EPA in the U.S. 

In addition, investors want to have put on the board those who understand U.S. litigation and crop science. 

Also, the elephant in the room is that Roundup is still being sold. There are commercials for it on U.S. network television.

For now, leaders of the company will probably keep their jobs. That's primarily because the financial and branding situation is so severe that it would be more risky to have a management shakeup than just cruise along.

The Bayer perfect storm, to use the cliche, is one which would make a fascinating case study for U.S. public relations crisis experts. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Former WWE Perfomer Ashley Massaro, 39, Reported to Have Committed Suicide

Can a failed lawsuit "kill?"

Maybe.

All too often litigation becomes an obsession. When the legal system dismisses it those who had filed it could tumble into emotional despair and/or rage.

For former WWE performer Ashley Massaro the response might have been hopelessness.

In November 2016, she had participated in a class action lawsuit against WWE.

It contended WWE did not warn its performers about possible head injuries which could result in concussions. In addition, Massaro claimed she had been sexually assaulted when engaging in a WWE event.

The lawsuit had been dismissed.

Allegedly as a result of her injuries she suffered clinical depression and addiction to pain killers.

Now, it is reported that her death had been a suicide, at age 39, had been a suicide. Here is coverage by the media.

WWE has long been controversial. This death might prompt politicos to authorize a comprehensive investigation of the health and well-being of the performers.

There are those, however, who claim that the performers should be aware of the risks they take when entertaining. As with football, this sport may just continue on, as is. It's big business.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Tony Robbins - Will BuzzFeed Investigation Do to Him What The New Yorker Ones Did to Harvey Weinstein, Les Moonves?

Law firm for celebrities Lavely & Singer denies it all. Among its clients is Bill Cosby. 

The "it" is the allegation of inappropriate behavior by mega guru Tony Robbins. That ranges from alleged verbal abuse of audience members to sexual misconduct with employees.

But BuzzFeed stands by its findings of an investigation which included leaked recordings, internal documents, and interviews. The focus of all that has been the alleged secret conduct of self-help coach Robbins.

Unlike mental health professionals, coaches in that niche do not require licensing. And Robbins' empire is closely guarded from media. His coaching presentations aren't allowed to be recorded.  Here is that BuzzFeed expose. 

Immediately one wonders if the BuzzFeed investigation will derail the career of Robbins, just like The New Yorker ones by Ronan Farrow did the professional life of Harry Weinstein and Les Moonves. Here is one of Farrow's articles on Weinstein, dated October 2017.

In addition, will these accusations prompt the push to license all those who declare themselves "coaches?" In some sophisticated circles, life coaches have replaced psychotherapists. 

The accusations are, well, colorful. Allegedly Robbins had his followers, as a tutorial, simulate sexual release. He berated those who claimed they were victims of rape. It was contended he would have his employees take notes in his apartment while he was naked, as in exiting the shower. Five women have made those kinds of sexual harassment claims. 

If these allegations can be proven or if Robbins caves and admits them, that would be no surprise. Power can unhinge judgment. Those with it might assume they can "get away" with unethical and illegal actions. They figure the victims will be too frightened to snitch. 

This story certainly has legs. The immediate issue is: Will it deliver a blow right now to Robbins' business interests? The #MeToo movement still has momentum. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Following Example of President Macron, Should US Pilot Shutting Down Harvard Law School?

In France, populist protesting has taken the form of the yellow-vests. 

As a disruptive solution to reducing inequality, reports The Wall Street Journal:

"  ... President Emmanuel Macron wants to shut his alma mater, the Ecole Nationale d'Administration, or ENA, an institution that has become a symbol of France's close-knit elite and persistent class divide."

Way back in 1945, when the school had been founded, this wasn't the way it was. Its mission actually was to level the playing field for all in France who wanted to gain access to respected career paths.

Then, ENA hardened into a feeder pool for the privileged to land top jobs. With that went the continuation of their elite positioning and packaging in French society.

That radical strategy could send the right message throughout France: Government leadership is serious about restoring equality of opportunity.

Why not pilot that model here in the U.S. where there is the growing divide between those with wealth and the 55% who live paycheck to paycheck. 

That could start with Harvard.

Harvard was launched by the Puritans in 1636. The need was pragmatic. They had to train ministers and teachers for their life in the new world.

But then the branding game overwhelmed everything else.

The experiment can kick off slowly: Declare a moratorium on parts of Harvard University, such as Harvard Law School for X number of years. Then analyze the impacts on creating a land of equal opportunity. Go on from there.

Full Disclosure: From an immigrant background I strove to be admitted to Harvard. I was. It took years to sort out that shouldn't have been a goal.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

"Good Girls" - Did We Have Beth All Wrong?

On Sunday night's episode of "Good Girls," FBI Jim makes a provocative assertion: Beth is a bad human being.

That is something many of us devoted to this series probably have not considered. Is Beth not simply a mother who needed money, was introduced to crime, and found she loved the scene? Could it be more than that?

FBI Jim makes that statement to Noah, undercover agent who had pried damaging information loose from Annie. That's why, he explains, the two of them need to dig up the really bad stuff Beth is doing. If they go only with what they have now she will get "Martha Stewart time."

FBI Jim may be on the money, pun intended. Dean and Beth have a heart-to-heart. She admits she can't give up the life of crime. She is proud that she is so good at it. She also can't give up sex with GangBanger (who we learn had the real name of "Chris.")

Because she can't "stop," Dean has drawn up divorce papers. She signs them, even though she may or may not lose her four children. Isn't it terrible for a mother not to do whatever it takes to remain with her children?

An alternate explanation for Beth's decision-making may be that she is simply an addict. She has become hooked on the high of planning, committing, and then concealing crimes. 

Other developments Sunday night:

Annie trails Noah and finds him conferring with FBI Jim. That confirms her hunch that he is not what he seems. Unfortunately she had already told him too much. However, Beth and Ruby mandate that she now leverage her relationship with Noah to feed him misleading information. The FBI will be thrown off-track.

The lawyer Ruby wants to hire to defend Stan seems highly competent - and crooked. He demands extra payment from her because he suspects the money came from illegal sources. Instead of a retainer of $10,000, Ruby has to pony up about $30,000. She is using counterfeit funds.

The three assume that they have recovered Boomer's body. Therefore, GangBanger can't hold that over them. However, the body in Beth's front yard may not be Boomer's.

In the next episode crazy Mary Pat parachutes back into the action. How we missed her outstanding acting.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

"Holly Atkinson, et al. v. Prabhjot Singh, et al." - Alleged Gaslighting

Some bits of litigation resonate in the collective unconscious. And make for major media stories. 

One of them could be "Holly Atkinson, et al. v. Prabhjot Singh, et al." 

That because it alleges "gaslighting" or the deliberate effort to have others doubt their sanity.

Who hasn't been a victim of that at home, school, on the job, and/or in a romantic relationship?  

In addition, the alleged masters of the gaslighting are or were big wigs at the prestigious Arnhold Institute for Global Health (AIGH), which is part of the Mount Sinai Health System's Icahn School of Medicine in New York City.

Put the two together and this is one lawsuit which the defendants, if guilty, should not want to go to trial. They should push for a rapid settlement. The longer this unresolved complaint is out there the more damage can be done to the careers of the defendants and the brand of AIGH as well as Mount Sinai.

Here is coverage by Science Magazine of that lawsuit, filed in federal court April 26th, 2019.

And here is a copy of the 174-page complaint. When you read the lawsuit, you will notice that Mount Sinai Health System is named as a defendant.

Essentially, the complaint alleges discrimination based on gender, age, race, religion, and national origin. The game, the seven female and one male plaintiffs contend, was that the director - Prabhjot Singh - who was hired in 2015 made it his business to drive out older female employees and hire younger males.

Singh, along with his chief of staff - David Berman - allegedly used gaslighting tactics, in hopes that the women would resign. In an article in Psychology Today by Stephanie Sarkis, Ph.D., "gaslighting" is defined as:

" ... a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality."

Dr. Sarkis notes that is more effective than most assume. Usually it starts out slowly. The victim is unaware that the manipulation method is being used - usually until it is too late. The suffering can be profound.

Among the alleged approaches inflicted at AGIH was having physician and former medical journalist - Holly Atkinson demoted. She had built and directed the human rights program there. If she wanted to remain employed at AGIH she was told she would have to had to take a $60,000 pay cut. Her new job responsibilities including maintaining a Mailchimp list. 

Some plaintiffs took notes during their interactions with the AGIH leadership in order to confirm for themselves that such and such a direction was given at the time. Later that was made not to seem what had previously been ordered.

In addition to alleged discrimination, the complaint contends Singh did not tell the truth to funders about the status of a software project and did not have the mandatory reviews for some research initiatives. Those are issues which come up in plot lines of the pop culture hospital shows. 

Depending on how much attention this lawsuit receives in the general and scientific media, "Atkinson v. Singh" could rock the medical community. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

"EEOC v. Defender Association of Philadelphia" - Were There Violations of Americans with Disabilities Act?

At the Defender Association, in 2012, lawyer Megan Perez began doing at Defender Association of Philadelphia the reverse of what fictional Olivia Benson does on "Law & Order SVU."

Essentially she defended juveniles accused of sex crimes. She parachuted in when Benson's unit collars and charges a minor of alleged sexual misconduct. 

In 2014, Perez had been assigned to be a sexually violent predator specialist. She indicated she was not comfortable with the assignment. Her employer said it would only last 2 years. It went on for 30 months.

Long story short, in 2017, she began be treated by a licensed therapist who recommended a leave of absence under the Family and Medical Leave Act. In August of that year she was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder and PTSD which was said to be caused by her work at a sexually violent predator specialist.

Initially her employer agreed to the leave and a transfer to work not involving sex crimes.

However, two months after that she was fired. 

As Max Mitchell reports in Law.com:

"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sued the Defender Association of Philadelphia over claims that the agency failed to properly accommodate a supervising attorney in the juvenile unit who allegedly developed a major depression and post-traumatic stress disorder from handling sex crime cases."

The lawsuit was filed April 26th in federal court. It is 'EEOC v. Defender Association of Philadelphia." Here is a copy of the 10-page complaint. 

Obviously, this litigation is of concern to all who do jobs which can induce significant trauma. Those range from police officers and fire fighters to ER medical doctors and nurses and child protective services staff.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Whistle-Blowers - Doing the Supposed Right Thing at Great Peril

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange might not be likable. 

Many are jittery enough about national security to be wary of the Edward Snowden types.

And lawsuits such as "Andowah Newton v. LVHM" may us wonder about the downside of movements such as #MeToo.

But, we know from history, such as WaterGate, that whistleblowers are necessary for democracy and the sustainability of the legal system. 

So, it's scary that Edward Wasserman is flagging us in The New York Times about the precarious situation whistleblowers faces. He is the dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California. The title of his opinion-editorial is: "Julian Assange and the Woeful State of Whistle-Blowers." Here you can read it. 

Both New York Magazine and Vanity Fair document this: A large number of the women who sued for alleged sexual misconduct or have been on the front lines of the #MeToo movement have suffered retaliation. Here is my coverage of that development.

Sure, doing the supposed right thing can be noble.

It can also be a heady experience.

But it is a form of whistle-blowing. The power structure is bound to push back. Speaking up, standing up - all that is risky business, literally. Careers can be temporarily or permanently derailed.

Yes, in the U.S. there are rewards for whistle-blowers. Those include, as The Wall Street Journal notes,  a nice payout from the IRS for disclosing information about tax cheats. On "Good Girls," FBI Jim promises Ruby much if she goes the distance in blowing the whistle on crime head Beth. 

Yes, society is also supposed to out bullies. Glassdoor is a mechanism for that in the workplace. The employee evaluations are anonymous. Here is how the help at The Dilenschneider Group perceives management.

Also yes, I outed on my syndicated blogs what I perceived to be an excessive vetting process by Your Edge for Success (YES).

It was for a contract assignment that wasn't even guaranteed to be for 15 hours a week. And the compensation was a project rate of $55 for editing each set of resume/cover letter. Suppose that had been job materials for a federal employee. The $55 compensation might not turn out to be much. 

Here is my push-back on Medium. 

But, hell, I have a successful communications boutique that deals in diverse lines of business. The resume/cover letter part has been and will be, well, small potatoes.

The risk? Practically zero. And taking on  YES and its head Katherine Metres served me well in terms of mental health.

Otherwise, I am cautious about outing wrongs associated with how I make my living. I am a single head of household. (Members are four-leggers.)

As Wasserman hammers, whistle-blowing is in a "woeful state."

Actually, I didn't need much of reminder of that. I grew up in the notorious Frank Hague political machine in Jersey City, New Jersey.

That was pre-gentrification.

There was no way to bypass the power of that machine except to leave the area.

From the get-go that was my goal. The exit ramp was, I strategically planned, a scholarship to an out-of-state college. That would provide the platform for putting together a more free life. 

Okay, I did get out. However, the residue of fear of the power structure has a long half life. Anyone from the Hague days probably can't entirely escape that force field.

Meanwhile, before those who need to make a living and want to do the supposed right thing have to consider the real possibility of never working in their field again. What on a macro level might be assessed as "right," could on the level of the individual trigger careeer interrupted.  

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Fisher-Price Drops Ball on Crisis Management - Now, Flood of Class Action Lawsuits about Rock 'n Play Sleepers

Government regulators in Australia and Canada had expressed public concern over Fisher-Price's Rock 'n Play sleepers.

So had Consumer Reports, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and others.

The product has been allegedly linked to infant deaths, injuries, and the development of flat heads. The number out there is that 32 infants allegedly died as a result of possible defects in the product and that there had been no warning regarding risks for infants three months or older. 

Yet, Fisher-Price, whose parent is Mattel, did not immediately do a recall and stop selling the product. Instead, reports Amanda Bronstad in Law.com, it lobbied the Consumer Product Safety Commission to duck the possibilities of any damage to the brand or the necessity of a recall. 

It wasn't until April 12th that there was a voluntary recall. That covers 4.7 million sleepers. Meanwhile the product continues to be available on secondary markets. Those include Amazon, Craigslist, and Facebook. 

Obviously, Fisher-Price bungled crisis management. Its brand may never recover. In addition, there already have been four class action lawsuits. More are expected. 

A major plaintiff lawyer in the loop is Jonathan Sorkowitz of Pierce Bainbridge. Law.com provides background.

On April 18th,Sorkowitz  filed a lawsuit in federal court in the state of New York. The lead plaintiffs are a couple whose three-month-old daughter died after being placed in the sleeper.

The Rock 'n Play deaths allegedly occur when the infant is old enough to roll over.

That particular death occurred on September 25th. The lawsuit also focuses on how the refunds are being made and the continued availability of the product in the secondary markets. So, yes, Amazon is listed as a defendant.  That's a deep pocket involved.

Here is a copy of that class action lawsuit "Samantha Drover-Mundy, et al. vs. Fisher-Price, Mattel, Amazon."

Those in public relations can create a case study of how Fisher-Price could have prevented what could be a global reversal of fortune. There is the old-time adage: It isn't what happens, it's how you handle it.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Unethical, Illegal - But Law Firms Have Solid Reasons for Not Championing Family Life

The cultural, social, and economic shift is obvious: Few in industrialized nations pressure anyone to have children. 

The baby is no longer a symbol of blessings.

A secure well-paying job is. And holding onto that job means not being "distracted" by family obligations. Yes, career reality can be that brutal. That's probably the stealth mindset at your large law firm. 

According to the OECD, the birth rate at below 2.1  in industrialized nations is lower than what is needed to replace the human beings on planet earth. Here are more details from Fortune.

Some macro economic experts see peril in the declining birth rate. 

For instance, there are fewer workers to make up for the large wave of retirement taking place in industrialized nations. So, who is going to fund entitlements for the aging such as social security and subsidized health care? Already, youth resents older members of society. Yes, there is generational warfare.

Also, the number of consumers is reduced. GDP growth in some nations such as the U.S. is primarily generated by consumer purchases. Here consumer activity accounts for about 70% of GDP.

Overall, children have become an economic burden. Since college is still perceived as a must, that means not only a financial burden for parents. Also, there will probably not be an empty nest for years. It is increasingly difficult for human beings in developed economies to get launched. Even before that, childcare tends to be very expensive.

Also, offspring can't be counted on to take care of parents in their old age. Given longer lifespans, by time the parents begin to become less independent their children are middle-aged, with plenty of their own challenges. For instance, their employer might be trying to force them out before of age.

I bore witness to that in a subsidized residential complex for the aging in New Haven, Connecticut. The offspring didn't pitch in joyfully during that interim period between when their parents were navigating things on their own and when then heading toward assisted living. Instead of concern, there is agitation. 

Sure, some members of my baby boomer generation have great satisfaction from interacting with their grandchildren. But many others make it their mission to move far away from family in order not to be saddled with childcare. 

Prediction: More and more of us will become parents of four-leggers versus two-leggers.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.