TD3 said:

babynoz said:

Where is all this talk about jealous, bitchy women coming from? The article doesn't say a single word about harassment from jealous female co-workers. From what I read, her claim says that she was transferred for complaining about sexual harassment.

So what did I miss? Was she harassed or fired by female bosses?

I said, I was thinking...

Hypothetically speaking .....

You can miss a lot because sexual, racial, and/or harassment discrimination suits usually have layers to them. Yes, in some instances the harassment and/or discrimination that's being alleged is one on one but in some instances the harassment and/or discrimination happens within the cultural of the workplace. It's not just a superior/ supervisor everyone piles on for dubious reasons. There's a lot missing from this news piece. I would like to know how long she worked for Citibank? When she was hired and did she come in under a probationary period?

Ms. Lorenzana claims she was fired after she complained - I'm assuming higher ups weren't all men - about being sexually harassed . I would be very surprised if all of those people she complained to were men. To be fair her complaints may have gone on deaf ear not because her claim(s) didn't have merit or coworkers were jealous... most people don't stick their neck out when they see wrong doing if fear of hurting their careers. .

If could've been she was fired because she was insubordinate and/or incompetent . If Ms. Lorenzana was told she was fired because she didn't adhere to Citibank's dress code, I'd be suspicious. If she had positive evaluations and then the went "south", I'd be suspicious.

Who knows, all this will come out in court, discrimination/harassment cases are very hard to prove, even when the rights of workers have been violated.

Those are all possibilities and the story could be missing some details, but I was only going by what is actually written in the article.

babynoz said:

TD3 said:

I said, I was thinking...

Hypothetically speaking .....

You can miss a lot because sexual, racial, and/or harassment discrimination suits usually have layers to them. Yes, in some instances the harassment and/or discrimination that's being alleged is one on one but in some instances the harassment and/or discrimination happens within the cultural of the workplace. It's not just a superior/ supervisor everyone piles on for dubious reasons. There's a lot missing from this news piece. I would like to know how long she worked for Citibank? When she was hired and did she come in under a probationary period?

Ms. Lorenzana claims she was fired after she complained - I'm assuming higher ups weren't all men - about being sexually harassed . I would be very surprised if all of those people she complained to were men. To be fair her complaints may have gone on deaf ear not because her claim(s) didn't have merit or coworkers were jealous... most people don't stick their neck out when they see wrong doing if fear of hurting their careers. .

If could've been she was fired because she was insubordinate and/or incompetent . If Ms. Lorenzana was told she was fired because she didn't adhere to Citibank's dress code, I'd be suspicious. If she had positive evaluations and then the went "south", I'd be suspicious.

Who knows, all this will come out in court, discrimination/harassment cases are very hard to prove, even when the rights of workers have been violated.

Those are all possibilities and the story could be missing some details, but I was only going by what is actually written in the article.

OK.

MacDaddy said:

This is probably not politically correct but what the hell;

omg YOU could get fired!!!

Cinnie said:

He looks like that Right Saids Fred dude.

728huey said:

Cinnie said:

MacDaddy said:

omg YOU could get fired!!!

He looks like that Right Saids Fred dude.

hahah i don't know about that but it may as well be his theme song

paintedlady said:

Reel said:

There was this woman on my job who wore pretty much the same thing, and she was asked by personnel to "tone it down". Yeah, turtle necks, and pencil skirts sound innocent enough. However, this woman was very very curvey and those turtle necks were very tight, as were her skirts. I would see men unconsciously following her with their eyes. I think it had the potential for disaster. However unlike the woman in the article, "our girl" was coorperative, and she did tone it down as much as she could without wearing a burka lol. She basically stopped wearing fitted clothing to work, and if it was unavoidable, she'd wear a jacket or a vest over her blouse.

People with certain body types have to be mindful of how they appear in a particular outfit. The same goes when you see a 350 pound woman wearing clothes that really are not flattering to her body sizes.

ANY clothing that causes distraction should not be worn at the office. This is why men don't wear hot pink suits to the office.

At 30+ years of age, she should know better. Other women have nothing to do with this situation, if she wants/needs attention, she should seek it in a different way. If she wants to be taken seriously she should want to be a professional and her clothing should reflect that attitude. Women absolutely know when they turn heads. She knows she's sexy, she knows how dumb men are. She should work that to her advantage at the work place, not mess herself up playing Jessica Rabbit.

She can be sexy , professional AND exude class with the right clothing no matter what her body type is. Time for her to buy new clothes.

You got it!

^^ I totally agree.

Using myself as an example...

I have a big butt, so I turn around after I get dressed and make sure that I don't become a teenage boy's fantasy when I leave the house.

I was never conscious of it until a few years ago, when a couple of former students (in their 20s) came to visit me and they were "reminiscing" about how much they loved when I turned around to write on the board!

Now I wear long jackets or don't tuck my shirt in when the pants cling too much.

Whether we like it or not, we need to be mindful of the image we convey through our clothes.

All I got from this chick in the article is that we shouldn't bother to teach young girls that they need to dress appropriately in school- and later in the workplace. We can just wear what we want, and all we have to do is SUE if someone says something to us about it.

chocolate1 said:

^^ I totally agree.

Using myself as an example...

I have a big butt, so I turn around after I get dressed and make sure that I don't become a teenage boy's fantasy when I leave the house.

I was never conscious of it until a few years ago, when a couple of former students (in their 20s) came to visit me and they were "reminiscing" about how much they loved when I turned around to write on the board!

Now I wear long jackets or don't tuck my shirt in when the pants cling too much.

Whether we like it or not, we need to be mindful of the image we convey through our clothes.

All I got from this chick in the article is that we shouldn't bother to teach young girls that they need to dress appropriately in school- and later in the workplace. We can just wear what we want, and all we have to do is SUE if someone says something to us about it.

The way we dress and look sells. A sexy woman would go far in a sexy work place, sounds like this woman would rock being a rep. for a company like Victoria's Secret.

Heck even in sweats you can look like a Playboy bunny. Athletic wear can look quite sexy if done right.

I think this woman is in the wrong type of work... she should sell products that promote "sexy". She would never have to compromise that way.

Cinnie said:

MacDaddy said:

This is probably not politically correct but what the hell;

omg YOU could get fired!!!

Id hire him...

They hiring at my job, they got many positions open. All she gotta do is choose which one she like ...

She betta STFU...

'Too hot for Citi' banker now faces firing from Chase for talking about suit

By DAREH GREGORIAN

Last Updated: 8:07 AM, June 7, 2010

Posted: 4:18 AM, June 7, 2010

^^^ Yeah, I read that in the Daily News. She's milking her 15 minutes, that's for sure.

She should go straight to porn.

uPtoWnNY said:

^^^ Yeah, I read that in the Daily News. She's milking her 15 minutes, that's for sure.

She should go straight to porn.

Maybe that's her goal. (That or a reality show.)

She doesn't seem worried about getting axed, so she probably has something already lined up.

uPtoWnNY said:

^^^ Yeah, I read that in the Daily News. She's milking her 15 minutes, that's for sure.

She should go straight to porn.

Exactly.

uPtoWnNY said:

She doesn't seem worried about getting axed, so she probably has something already lined up.

You know she does.

Genesia said:

FauxReal said:

JustErin said: Very true. Also ridiculous was the notion that it was because she wore cartoon shirts that it drew attention there...yeah okay. So you folks have issues with staring at Elmo while tithing now? I really doubt a same sized shirt without a cartoon would have made the difference. In fact, I'm sure she had worn some of those too.

I'm sorry - but who wears a cartoon shirt to church?

Me.

...and a good lot of us wear jeans and Converse (or Adidas) sneakers, too. Our pastor, a rather learned man from a highly esteemed family in Capetown, often wears traditional printed caftan shirts to reflect his African heritage, and yesterday we had an unexpected heatwave that sent half the female congregation into colorful halter dresses, and a good portion of the men (Deacon board members and my worship leader fiancee included) into cargo shorts. If it's not one of those churches that forces its parishioners to wear what they consider to be formal church attire, I don't see why a t-shirt with a cartoon character on it would look out of place in a church...anyhoo....

Ottensen said:

Genesia said:

I'm sorry - but who wears a cartoon shirt to church?

Me.

...and a good lot of us wear jeans and Converse (or Adidas) sneakers, too. Our pastor, a rather learned man from a highly esteemed family in Capetown, often wears traditional printed caftan shirts to reflect his African heritage, and yesterday we had an unexpected heatwave that sent half the female congregation into colorful halter dresses, and a good portion of the men (Deacon board members and my worship leader fiancee included) into cargo shorts. If it's not one of those churches that forces its parishioners to wear what they consider to be formal church attire, I don't see why a t-shirt with a cartoon character on it would look out of place in a church...anyhoo....

Okay, well...to me it is a far cry from a colorful summer dress to a cartoon t-shirt.

Diff'rent strokes...

JustErin said:

uPtoWnNY said:

She doesn't seem worried about getting axed, so she probably has something already lined up.

You know she does.

a realilty show, most likely

NDRU said:

JustErin said:

You know she does.

a realilty show, most likely

Or she'll leak her sex-tape.

That happened to me once.

And I never, ever miss a chance to tell anyone about it.

"Today my boss called me into her office and told me to sit down and that we needed to talk. I asked her what was wrong and she told me that my erect penis was distracting the other employees. I was mortified and told her that my throbbing phallus was nobody's business but my own! She then told me to either lose my erection or lose my job."

[Edited 6/7/10 11:19am]

Genesia said:

She betta STFU...

'Too hot for Citi' banker now faces firing from Chase for talking about suit

By DAREH GREGORIAN

Last Updated: 8:07 AM, June 7, 2010

Posted: 4:18 AM, June 7, 2010

She said her body was too hot for Citibank, but her mouth may be too big for Chase.

Debrahlee Lorenzana filed a lawsuit saying she was booted from her job at Citibank for being too sexy in her work clothes, and now says she faces the firing line again from her bosses at Chase for sullying the reputation of the financial industry.

The Queens stunner said she was told that if she went ahead with scheduled television interviews today to talk about her suit, she'd once again be without a job.

"They asked me if I was going to proceed. They said if I kept talking, it was grounds for termination," Lorenzana, 33, told The Post yesterday.

The trouble began Thursday at her new job as a personal banker at a Chase branch in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, when stories about her suit against Citibank appeared in the newspapers, she said.

Her boss said Citibank is upset about all the interviews and that the hush order came from CEO Jamie Dimon, the single mom said.

"I said, 'I'm going to speak to the media -- this has nothing to do with you.' "

When she showed up for work Friday, her bosses kept harassing her to call off the planned TV appearances.

"I was under so much stress, [my boss] said it wasn't up to her and that the only thing I can tell you is pray," she said, in response to whether she would be fired.

Then Saturday night, her manager sent her a text message saying her day-off request for Monday was cancelled. But she still plans to appear on NBC's "Today" show and ABC's "Good Morning America" today.

A Chase spokesman declined to comment.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/stop_order_F9DaqpePVDUIDAEduzgUmJ

This chick sounds more and more like a person desperate to always be the center of attention and who is addicted to (stirring up) controversy, and is ALWAYS "being harassed" by SOMEone about SOMEthing.

After she gets canned from Chase, maybe she can apply for unemployment or assistance and get "harassed" there, sue the state, call more press conferences (where she'll wear more low cut tops) etc...

Genesia said:

FauxReal said:

JustErin said: Very true. Also ridiculous was the notion that it was because she wore cartoon shirts that it drew attention there...yeah okay. So you folks have issues with staring at Elmo while tithing now? I really doubt a same sized shirt without a cartoon would have made the difference. In fact, I'm sure she had worn some of those too.

I'm sorry - but who wears a cartoon shirt to church?

Well, in my church on the 2nd Sunday of every month, it's "Denim Sunday". Everyone in the church- including the pastor- wears jeans. So there might be someone there in a cartoon shirt or whatever.

My church is in an area where we do not worry about what people are wearing; some people shy away from church because they "have nothing to wear." We would rather have you "come as you are" than stay away.

Genesia said:

Ottensen said:

Me.

...and a good lot of us wear jeans and Converse (or Adidas) sneakers, too. Our pastor, a rather learned man from a highly esteemed family in Capetown, often wears traditional printed caftan shirts to reflect his African heritage, and yesterday we had an unexpected heatwave that sent half the female congregation into colorful halter dresses, and a good portion of the men (Deacon board members and my worship leader fiancee included) into cargo shorts. If it's not one of those churches that forces its parishioners to wear what they consider to be formal church attire, I don't see why a t-shirt with a cartoon character on it would look out of place in a church...anyhoo....

Okay, well...to me it is a far cry from a colorful summer dress to a cartoon t-shirt.

Diff'rent strokes...

Not just colorful summer dresses; full on halter dresses, some regular length, some maxi length, but with bared shoulders

Okay, now i'm just teasing. It's true I attend a church without a dress code and the parishioners (average age 30-45) most certainly do wear these things, but no one is is shocked if a person dresses conservatively or not, actually. Jeans & tees, or bare shoulders in a sundress and sandals are okay just as conservative attire is . Personally I only get anal about shoes; my policy is "no flip flops in the city", as in if I'm not at home , the beach,or a close friend's house, I absolutely eschew flip flop shoes of any kind while in the city, for business or pleasure .

JustErin said:

Genesia said:

I have been harassed exactly twice in my 25-year professional life. Once by a boss who made a crude comment about me in front of some other people (but did not come on to me - though he was abusive in other ways toward everyone who worked for him - male and female). And once by a boss who actually came on to me, took no for an answer, apologized, and said it wouldn't happen again. He left the organization shortly after that for other reasons.

And I honestly don't know any other women who've been systematically harassed. My friends and I have all worked in male-dominated professions without any problems, to speak of. Then again, we've all been careful about how we acted and dressed at work.

I've been harassed by several male bosses and several male co-workers. I've also seen jealous bitchface co-workers go to it first hand - with eachother.

This was what I was waiting to hear...

Genesia said:

She betta STFU...

'Too hot for Citi' banker now faces firing from Chase for talking about suit

By DAREH GREGORIAN

Last Updated: 8:07 AM, June 7, 2010

Posted: 4:18 AM, June 7, 2010

She said her body was too hot for Citibank, but her mouth may be too big for Chase.

Debrahlee Lorenzana filed a lawsuit saying she was booted from her job at Citibank for being too sexy in her work clothes, and now says she faces the firing line again from her bosses at Chase for sullying the reputation of the financial industry.

The Queens stunner said she was told that if she went ahead with scheduled television interviews today to talk about her suit, she'd once again be without a job.

"They asked me if I was going to proceed. They said if I kept talking, it was grounds for termination," Lorenzana, 33, told The Post yesterday.

The trouble began Thursday at her new job as a personal banker at a Chase branch in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, when stories about her suit against Citibank appeared in the newspapers, she said.

Her boss said Citibank is upset about all the interviews and that the hush order came from CEO Jamie Dimon, the single mom said.

"I said, 'I'm going to speak to the media -- this has nothing to do with you.' "

When she showed up for work Friday, her bosses kept harassing her to call off the planned TV appearances.

"I was under so much stress, [my boss] said it wasn't up to her and that the only thing I can tell you is pray," she said, in response to whether she would be fired.

Then Saturday night, her manager sent her a text message saying her day-off request for Monday was cancelled. But she still plans to appear on NBC's "Today" show and ABC's "Good Morning America" today.

A Chase spokesman declined to comment.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/stop_order_F9DaqpePVDUIDAEduzgUmJ

Ha ha ha! See now she really has grounds to sue. How can another bank tell you that you have no right to tell your Mucked Up story about another bank to the media. Even though I think that woman is kinda "twisted"....she does in fact have the right to make her allegations public (no matter how ludacrist they are). I think this is bank cronieism in it's highest form. Now Chase is going to be added to the suit.

I watched a clip of her on TV this morning.

I lost at least 20 IQ points just listening to her.

Reel said:

How can another bank tell you that you have no right to tell your Mucked Up story about another bank to the media

This second story is some mess. Her new job is barely mentioned, so I don't see how they can say she could be terminated for talking.

I feel awful for this beautiful woman

Cinnie said:

Reel said:

How can another bank tell you that you have no right to tell your Mucked Up story about another bank to the media

This second story is some mess. Her new job is barely mentioned, so I don't see how they can say she could be terminated for talking.

I feel awful for this beautiful woman

I find it hard to believe that if she was a great employee that she'd be having problems at her new job either. I suspect she is the common denomenator

what was her previous job like, I wonder?