Turns out Harvey was clever...and creepy! Has a clause in his contract stating no repercussions due to sexual harassment as long as he paid settlements out of own pocket and did not use company assets...this would constitute wrongful termination...cue sad trombone music...
sharegood luck getting a court to enforce that clause
shareIt's pretty clear cut ...signed contracts still carry weight in the US justice system. Considering the grounds for his termination were broadcast over the airwaves of every local national and international news outlet for atleast a 48 hour rotation...it's gonna be hard to claim Harvey (and the rest of the world) misunderstood the grounds for termination. Also...this will never make it to court! No one involved stands to gain anything from a public trial...this will be handled in house. I think you are missing the big headline though...not only was Harvey aware of his potentially devastating self destructive behavior enough to have clause protecting him from termination...but EVERYONE around him knew it...and AGREED TO HIS TERMS!!!
shareIt may not matter as the company maybe insolvent shortly - the talent agencies are refusing to do business with them
http://deadline.com/2017/10/the-weinstein-co-nears-the-brink-as-agencies-cut-off-talent-supply-1202187269/
Oh yeah they're done...Especially since they are now sniffing around what brother bob knew...we all now know he was aware of a clause protecting his brother from just such accusations and reprisals...my grandad used to say men like these were so dumb they couldn't poor piss from a boot if the instructions were on the bottom of the heel...
shareWell this imploded quickly, i am so surprised....
shareI posted a link to an article below.
But yeah, it's mega-creepy that he put that his contract and that the board agreed to it, and yeah, it is likely to result in a massive lawsuit. Because rumor has it that Harvey's brother Bob wanted to force him out of the shared company, and was behind the article that started this mess. If so, a toad like Harvey would rather destroy the company in court than let his brother take over, so I bet that's his next move.
If course the real reason he was fired was that he's now a massive embarrassment to the Weinstein Group, but for all I know that's also covered by that evil contract.
That clause doesn't include sexual assault. Criminal prosecution would be grounds for firing.
shareTo be fair, no contract can nullify assault. That being said, I agree that if a prosecution would occur the Weinstein company would have been well within their rights to terminate employment on those grounds...BUT...one must not put the cart before the team...he has yet to be charged with a crime, therefore there is no current prosecution,therefor those grounds are beyond premature as was TWCs
Statements regarding the termination. They rung a bell that they can't unring.
I don't think a clause in a contract that allows the person to commit a crime is enforceable.
shareThat's what "no contract can nullify assault" clearly means...but again what crime was charged at the time he was terminated? As of yet he has no charges pending, so publicly firing him on grounds of sexual harassment(not a crime,nor grounds for termination per contractual agreements)was premature. Let's say he is arrested tomorrow and charged with some form of assault...TWC can't then say...oh we meant he was fired for assault,not that groundless reason we said last week...on television...and in the letters of dismissal...which our lawyers drew up...Nope, they are now locked in the cause for termination...
share