Sunday, June 2, 2013

In the Line of Fire: Imad Hamad and the Sexual harassment claim Boondoggle- I






 In the Line of Fire: Imad Hamad and the Sexual harassment claim Boondoggle- I

What is the easiest way to tarnish a man’s reputation? Make allegations as to sexual harassment.

This is the story of Mr. Imad Hamad, the director of the American Arab anti-discrimination Committee, with a former staffer, Michigan representative Rashida Tlaib’s “open letter” alleging that Mr. Hamad had “sexually harassed” her FIFTEEN years ago and has harassed other female employees as well.

The timing and the motivations are highly suspicious.

I am not saying it is not possible that Imad Hamad acted in an offensive manner or that he made sexual advances or sexual comments- even that what she said actually happen. It is possible. Only God knows what happened and the two people involved in the encounter/s.
The question is did he sexually harass anyone? The clear answer is NO.
If we take the letter, on the face of it, these are frivolous allegations meant to damage the man’s reputation.

Let me backtrack.

When I was in law school a classmate related this story to me.
 She was interning with a law office when she was asked by the lawyer to get her a file. The file was in the bottom of the file cabinet. She bent down to get it. When she did the lawyer said "oh baby don’t do that to me" and commented about her big behind. She turned around and told him not to talk to her that way and that if that happens again she would quit. He apologized and never did it again. Case closed.

Was the proper? No. 

Was that sexual harassment? NO.

Sexual harassment is two kinds:  quid pro quo or hostile work environment.

Quid pro quo is one thing for another. This when a supervisor or a manager has a job benefit contingent on a sexual favor from the employee.
Hostile work environment is a workplace that is rife with sexual innuendo that makes working there impossible for the claimant.

What Rashida is asserting –even if true- is not sexual harassment. It's simply NOT sexual harassment.

In her letter Rashida claims that she is concerned about allegations of sexual harassment raised by other women against Imad.

That there were "sexual advances"- "very aggressive."
"Made comments about my breasts."
"Played with my hair."

And then I worked there for six months and quit

Oddly enough- Rashida does not state in her letter whether the advances were contingent on a job benefit or whether she asked that the alleged behavior stopped and it did not stop.
Rashida went to law school and is a state rep. in charge of writing our laws. She should know the law.
Even if Rashida is to be believed- what she is complaining about are aggressive advances. The Supreme Court said that as to sexual advances there is no harm to asking.


The allegations of sexual harassment are unfounded. 

Any lawyer who knows some law would reach the same conclusion.

No comments: