NASCAR: Innocent Until Proven Guilty
Everyone in America is given the benefit of the doubt when confronted with legal actons whether they be of a criminal or civil nature. With news breaking of a discrimination lawsuit filed against NASCAR that’s exactly how I’ll treat the news, NASCAR is innocent until proven guilty.
That said, given my well known dislike for lawyers I will take a couple pot-shots at the suit filed on behalf of Mauricia Grant, who is black, worked as a technical inspector responsible for certifying cars in NASCAR’s second-tier Nationwide Series from January 2005 until she was fired last October.
She claims, or rather her shysters claim after fluffing up the charge sheet claim, she was called “Nappy Headed Mo” and “Queen Sheba,” by co-workers, was often told she worked on “colored people time” and was frightened by one official who routinely made references to the Ku Klux Klan.
The first red flag I’ll toss is why is she the only one raising this issue? She’s not the only minority working the garages in all three of NASCAR’s series’. That she is the only one makes me lean toward the skeptical side. Her shysters would have beat the bushes for months looking for corroboration via others and they would have been added to the suit if there were any.
The lawsuit, filed Today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, lists multiple instances of alleged sexual harassment and racial discrimination.
“NASCAR perpetuated, condoned and actively participated in perverted and disgusting sexual conduct designed to demean and diminish (Grant) and the handful of other women employed by NASCAR as officials,” according to the suit.
A handful of other women? Why aren’t they part of the suit then?
That’s my second red flag based on the fact the shysters would have sold their first born trying to convince others to join the suit. They obviously failed.
Grant said she complained numerous times to her supervisors about the way she was treated, to no avail. On one occasion, Grant said Nationwide Series director Joe Balash, her immediate supervisor, was dismissive of her complaints, explaining her co-workers were “former military guys” with a rough sense of humor.
“You just have to deal with it,” she says Balash told her.
This is not only a red flag but it flies next to a bullshit flag!
Former “military guys” are the last people on the planet to conduct themselves in this manner. Since the integration of women into the military in the early eighties all branches have extensive sexual harassment training programs to the point of redundancy and extreme bordom for those suffering through the “seminars.”
The incidents of harassment occurring in the military is the exception, not the rule and in most cases the problems that arise are rooted in something far from harassment and the potential of harassment charges are used as a club in an effort to scare someone.
None of this is to say NASCAR won’t be found at least partially guilty, stranger things have happened. But the language used in the suit leads me to think there’s something more at work, like an “activist” lawyer hoping to make a name for themselves and added charge-upon-charge to what would otherwise be a normal everyday wrongful termination suit.
Put another way, I ain’t buying what the shysters are selling. And I bet a jury won’t either.
Technorati Tags: NASCAR, Nationwide Series, Full Throttle
Like most sexual and racial discrimination suits, this will be tough to prove. If true, I admire her for standing up, if not, well she will not be doing any other minorities any favors in this sport.
Based on the length of the charges this smells like a little more than just smoke. I agree with your military take, but that comment was from the NASCAR guy, not the woman.
The only good that will come out of this is that Mother Daytona is not likely to settle this one out of court, and a decision in Daytona’s favor will do much to prevent more frivolous suits. If they lose on the other hand…….wheeeeew, don’t even want to contemplate the consequences of that one!
Sorry George, I ain’t buying any of the smoke being sold.
The despicable little turd that filed the discrimination suit after he was fired from his job as a transporter correction, motor coach driver filed a laundry list of charges also, it was tossed out for lack of merit.
I give a 90-10 chance this one will be also.
Unless she has documented the reporting to the correct superiors (which NASCAR has already claimed she did not even inform them), it will be tough for these allegations to be proven. But the real issue is not if these incidents took place (I am sure some of not all of them could have to some extent)but did NASCAR turn a blind eye and ignore them?
As it stands NASCAR is being asked to prove a negative, but it is possible that they were not given the chance to correct this behavior as they were taking place.
On the other hand, Grant could claim the Plausible deniability of the NASCAR HR chain.
But since NASCAR has taken a hard line stance on similar issues, I don’t think the later is the case.
My wife and 9 year-old are the NASCAR fans in my household. Having an HR background and working in the area of employment law for employers, this does not look good for NASCAR. I am not buying the line that France or this blog is pushing. This is not a he said, she said matter - there are e-mails, text messages and incidents viewed by multiple people at multiple levels within the organization.
If NASCAR cannot see that racism and sexism have no place in the workplace, its sponsors will. No corporation wants to be associated with the level of alleged racist and sexist behavior alleged in this lawsuit.
I predict NASCAR will pay more dearly by fighting this lawsuit, than they would have if they would have settled the case in advance of the suit.
Well be happy in your opinion, but you are the ONLY source that has had anything to say regarding text messages.
There is a single ref to an email contained within the court papers filed and the rest of what you claim (”incidents viewed by multiple people at multiple levels within the organization”) is exactly what you claim it isn’t a he said, she said case.
You me or anyone else can make up a laundry list of crap and file any type of suit some shyster is willing to accept money for doing.
She may in fact win a suit or settle out of court (for about $3 mil) BUT it won’t be based on the long list of shit she has dreamed up it will be based on a couple nutcases within the organization.