<p>How is it harassment if it was willing / consensual?</p>
<p>Someone willingly slept with Letterman - :eek:</p>
<p>I think there is also an issue that the others in the workplace can complain that they were not treated fairly as the sexual partners were given preference. At least thats what they told us in my workplace seminar on innappropriate relationships. </p>
<p>Apparently the woman living with Halderman worked for Letterman and didnt like her nickname. </p>
<p>I never liked Letterman – this doesnt change my opinion.</p>
<p>It would he said, she said. But why has he only had affairs with his staffers, not with other women? It appears (not for sure) that he’s used his position to coerce them into having relationships with him.</p>
<p>I cannot agree with oldfort that sleeping with his subordinate is harrassment. It is not so automatic for me. I agree it could be. It may have been consentual. It may have been the females initiated it. They may have sought the physical pleasure or may have seen it as what used to be called “sleeping her way to the top”. None of those examples would be Letterman coercing an employee.
No doubt in my mind it was infidelity, but I cannot definitively state “it was harrassment”.
We may hear from the women now, now that it may become public. They may suddenly claim harrassment. It may be. But so far there is absolutely no evidence that it is.
Every time a false and/or premature accusation of rape, or incest, or harrassment comes about, that makes it harder to believe real claims. I for one, will wait on further evidence before I make a determination.</p>
<p>I’m sure LOTS of us CC’ers were hit on in the workplace (or still are) but since when does that mean you have to go ahead and have sex with someone?? Couldn’t they call EEO or something?</p>
<p>To me, this is just another example of fishing off the company pier. At my former workplace, the number of dalliances/affairs/relationships/marriages among co-workers is huge. Until someone proves it’s harrassment, I’m going to believe it’s adults doing what adults often do, and that’s have sex, even when it’s ill-advised.</p>
<p>I don’t know whether this happened during an on-again or off-again people period with his now-wife. I hope it was during an off period.</p>
<p>WTH was Halderman thinking? When I watched last night I’d already read online about the announcement, so I understood what was going on. I can see how it would have been very confusing for the studio audience.</p>
<p>I think a recent Supreme Court decision will give him a little comfort from a suit under the federal laws…if I’m not mistaken the suit has to be brought within 300 days.</p>
<p>Suits may be the least of his worries, though. We shall see.</p>
<p>So Letterman had affairS with coworkerS, and now decided to apologize??? I bet now he will use them as lines for his show. How sick! And this is the man who standed there and called a teenager a tramp for having a child.</p>
<p>After reading the news article, I realized that he is not sorry for doing what he did. He came forward because he was being blackmailed. Nice sort of person!</p>
<p>I think it is ver hard to prove. Many years ago, I was propositioned out right (it wasn’t subtle, no beating around the bushes). I said no. In six months, the guy called me on the phone to let me go. Were two events related? It would have been hard for me to prove it, and I didn’t want to waste my energy on it. Luckily, I did not need the job (my family wasn’t going to be out on the street).</p>
<p>I am not saying Letterman is guilty, all of those women may have been in awe of him and were only happy to sleep with him. At the same time, if he was such a lady’s man he would have also slept with other women, and we may find out that he has. I feel bad for his family.</p>
<p>Based on his public comments, I have the impression that women was below him.</p>
<p>^^^^
Pun intended, eucalyptus??? :D</p>
<p>The woman in question (the one who lives with Halderman – it’s not clear if they’re romantically involved) has now been publicly identified. She’s 34; the affair took place six or seven years ago, when she was one of Letterman’s personal assistants (he apparently has several at a time, all young and female). Later, he apparently paid her tuition at Cardozo Law School.</p>
<p>BunsenBurner:
</p>
<p>Thank you for the 2nd big laugh of my day on CC :D</p>
<p>Just watched the replay from his show last night. Bizarre. The laughter of the audience was so out of place, but they clearly had no idea he wasn’t joking until the very end.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Hold on, in the absence of blackmail, what reason does he have for coming forward?</p>
<p>I just read an article that said Halderman lives with Stepanie Birkett. I remember her from many of Dave’s bits over the years. He used to “call her” during the show and discuss her weekend’s activities and she was also the one who would wear a letter jacket and hand out the dinner gift certificates whenever Dave had contests in the audience. Did she also do some Olympic coverage? I’ve always wondered what happened to her, hadn’t seen her in quite awhile.</p>
<p>Halderman is an idiot. Once Letterman got his lawyer involved, he should have known it would go in a legal direction.</p>
<p>Wow, she already has a Wikipedia entry! [Stephanie</a> Birkitt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Birkitt]Stephanie”>Stephanie Birkitt - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Let’s understand, too that being “hit on” in the workplace isn’t harrassment. Not just that, by itself. It takes more than a one time proposition.
Now if one is “hit on” again and again and again, after a clear response of no interest, then that may be harrassment. Or, if one is a superior and says or implies that sex favors would be rewarded; or declining sex could be punished, than is harrassment.
A boss merely asking a subordinate on a date is not harrassment. Asking a second or third time may not be harrassment, depending on the way the person declines.
The alleged “victim” of harrassment has the obligation of making it clear the action is unacceptable for it to rise to the level of illegal harrassment. If a person declines a date and says the reason is that they already have plans(for example), then that is cetainly not a clear answer that there is no interest. A series of excuses is probably not considered enough, as the one asking might simply believe he(she) has had bad timing.</p>
<p>dke in post 26 jumps from one extreme to another. One the one hand dke mentions having sex if you’re hit on, then mentions calling labor boards. Whoa! There is a huge in-between. How about saying “no, I’m married and do not date others” or “no, I do not date bosses” ? Either of those gives a polite, clear, absolute NO to the one asking. THEN if the “hitting” persists document the actions and then consider legal action.</p>
<p>Glad to see oldfort(post 31) now sees a boss having sex with a subordinate isn’t automatically illegal harrassment. It could very well be a woman was in awe of his celebrity, much like a band groupie.</p>