Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief of staff Suzanne Barr resigned this weekend in an attempt to defuse accusations that she sexually harassed male co-workers.
The allegations emerged from a lawsuit which claimed that Barr humiliated male colleagues with sexually offensive language and actions.
According to affadavits, during a workplace conversation Barr turned to a male coworker and said "'you a sexy mothaf****!' She then looked at his crotch and asked, 'How long is it anyway?'" Another affidavit claims that Barr offered oral sex to a male colleague at a work-related party.
The lawsuit was filed by NY immigration official James Hayes against Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano. He claims she pushed him out of a management role because of his gender.
Barr has stated that all of the accusations against her are "unfounded and without any merit."
The accusations have drawn fire from Republican lawmakers like NY's Rep. Peter King, chair of the House Homeland Security Committee. He says his committee will "intensify" its scrutiny of DHS culture and "personnel practices."
First this is a half report. I would like to see the EEOC report including the one that gives these gentlemen the right to bring suit. What was said before Ms. Barr made her comment...If Ms. Barr were guilty of the inappropriate comments to her male (or female) coworkers then she needs to resign. If she is not guilty then she should not resign. You have to stand up for what is right and resignation only makes her look guilty. However, if she is an ineffective leader consumed with power...then she needs to step down as well. One would ask where was the EEO Officer that should have been awake and in place for a government agency.
Sometimes people in office offer their resignation in order to bring an investigation to an end. A resignation this early in the investigation, usually, but not always, means that there may be some early "negotiations"---in the making, and there is more than likely, an interest on both sides not to bring forth anymore damaging details. Just let it "quietly" go away. Although, in this case, with Rep. King getting involved. I think we are about to hear some very graphic testimony sometime down the road...
I'm going to have to disagree with you here. Although I think this person is probably guilty of these allegations, your logic is flawed because you misunderstand the corporate culture of government. Many government employees get thir jobs because of who they know. This creates an incentive to be loyal to that person or persons. If, subsequently, one is accused of something like this, it reflects badly not only on the employee but on their more powerful mentor(s). Whether or not the charges are true, the employee resigns to avoid collateral damage to their mentor; in return, when the heat is off, the mentor(s) will quietly find another political or government position for the person.
Bottom line, the simple fact that she resigned merely indicates how potentially embarrassing the charges are, not whether she's guilty. I think she is guilty because the alleged conduct seems to have taken place in public with witnesses.
@Stratton - 24 years in the military have taught me a thing or two about people and allegations.
You could very well be correct in your assessment.
However, I have watched and witnessed claims of harrassment filed against officers and enlisted. Those who were innocent and had moral strength fought tooth and nail to reclaim their honor and position.
Who knows her reasoning.
I fall back to the M. Jackson, child molestation accusations.
Why pay and destroy your name...your family name...if you are innocent?
@CanisCanemEdit - Or to put it another way, a person can be a spineless weasel but still not be guilty of what they are accused of. I would hope that our military men and women would be made of stiffer stuff so your differing experience makes sense to me.
Yah. I've found that, when working with males, you have to be able to take their lewd, disgusting comments, but they can't take any back at them.---- In other words, they can dish it out, but they can't take it. Sounds to me like they didn't like her, or she pizzzzzed one of them off, and they just wanted to get rid of her. She was probably just "one of the good ole boys" until that happened (whatever it was).
Correctness is correctness. Even her boss should be terminated janet napolitano is a waste of tax payers money. She/he should be on one of obamas social programs. Unemployment sound like a winner right now.
I've seen situations where sexual harassment in the workplace is used to weed someone out. They've made themselves somewhat of a pariah because they do things differently, or the majority doesn't like them because they are bossy or what have you. Behavior at that time isn't tolerated at the same level across the board. Were there others saying things along at the time she was? Likely. I wonder what she did to make herself a pariah? Oh to be a fly on the wall.
In my office we harass the heck out of each other. Lesbian jokes, Gay jokes, Heterosexual jokes, man jokes, female jokes, blond jokes, you name it. Plus some a$$ grabbing and plenty of jovial innuendos. We're all pretty tight friends. But I keep wondering if some day they'll hire some killjoy who'll complain and bring on the formality. We used to smoke in the office until some non-smoker was hired and killed it for the other 99% of us.