Famed B&H Photo hit with discrimination suit

[Derrel]

Yes, that's the headline from an article dated November 19,2009 at
FailedMessiah.com: B & H Photo, Satmar-Owned Mega Electronics Store Sued For Sex Discrimination

Nakisha Cushnie is a B&H cashier who wanted to advance from being a cashier and into sales. She and three other female employees have filed an over-$7-million dollar lawsuit against the retail giant. Cushnie alleges that she, "asked to work in sales and make more money, but was told that no women were allowed in sales for religious reasons."

In articles on the web today, B&H representatives denied her allegations and assured the public that they would look into the allegations.

Two years ago B&H agreed to pay $4.3 million to settle a lawsuit brought by Hispanic employees.

Details are in the above article, as well as on ABC and CBS web sites,each of which have their own articles.

[O|||||||O]

I wonder how this will affect their prices?

[Plato]

I don't know what this world is coming to. We should bring back the separate want-ad sections, "Male Help Wanted" and "Female Help Wanted."

[DennyCrane]

Simply an allegation at this point. Right now, the attorneys are going to try the case in the media to get their clients story out there. If the allegations are true, B&H will pay. If the story is not true, B&H will pay. Welcome to a tort-happy country.

[IgsEMT]

Quote:

I wonder how this will affect their prices?

My thoughts as well

[rocdoc]

Damn. I don't know what happened, and I hope it gets taken care of properly. But it's worrisome to see them getting into this kind of trouble. They have been the reference retailer for me, and I think others. Hope they stay in business.

[benhasajeep]

It's not just a Jewish thing. The Arabs over here do this as well. Men are the primary sales people (I'm in Israel right now for work). It's the way they work (here). Not sure if B&H is strictly the same. But they do observe Shabat and do not take sales during it. And close down on Jewish holidays. So, they are pretty much by the book. And unfortunately it runs against laws in the US (if true).

Wonder if they have ANY women sales people?

[camz]

Quote: Originally Posted by IgsEMT

Quote:

I wonder how this will affect their prices?

My thoughts as well

I guess it's time to switch back to Adorama

[KmH]

Quote: Originally Posted by DennyCrane

Simply an allegation at this point. Right now, the attorneys are going to try the case in the media to get their clients story out there. If the allegations are true, B&H will pay. If the story is not true, B&H will pay. Welcome to a tort-happy country.

+1... I also noticed the article didn't mention that the women were in fact qualified for the sales job(s) the were seeking.

I saw the one women mentioned in the article had been working for B&H for only 8 months.

I wonder if she sought any other sales jobs before going to work at B&H.

Like Denny says, at this point, either way B&H will have to pay. Which means B&H customers will have to pay.

[usayit]

Kinda reminds me about the man who sued Hooters....

BH photo are run by Orthodox Jews (it does matter) which makes them specific targets for this type of lawsuits.

I am more concerned with the $7million.... fine.. if they are found liable... but $7million? Wow... our society and legal system has really stooped to the bottom.



Get rich quick.. find someone to sue. It is the American way.

[RyanLilly]

This will be an interesting one, as far as constitutional law is concerned, both parties positions seem to be protected by different sections of the constitution. B&H, will argue "free exercise clause" in and the plaintiffs can argue "equal protection clause."
Although, there is probably already precedence on situations like this.

How long do you think It would take to earn $7 million on the sales floor?

[battletone]

Quote: Originally Posted by usayit

Kinda reminds me about the man who sued Hooters....

BH photo are run by Orthodox Jews (it does matter) which makes them specific targets for this type of lawsuits.

I am more concerned with the $7million.... fine.. if they are found liable... but $7million? Wow... our society and legal system has really stooped to the bottom.



Get rich quick.. find someone to sue. It is the American way.

But if they are not hiring any women sales people, then why should they be allowed to discriminate when others are not? I personally think privately owned businesses should be allowed to do anything they want, but they shouldn't get special treatment unless we reverse all discrimination laws. This is going to be a clear cut case...if they have women salesman, this lady has no case. If they don't, then they probably are breaking the law. It isn't a company with a handful of sales people is it? Sounds to me like they have enough employees that it would boarder on impossible to not accidentally find a qualified women for the position.

Quote: Originally Posted by RyanLilly

This will be an interesting one, as far as constitutional law is concerned, both parties positions seem to be protected by different sections of the constitution. B&H, will argue "free exercise clause" in and the plaintiffs can argue "equal protection clause."
Although, there is probably already precedence on situations like this.

How long do you think It would take to earn $7 million on the sales floor?

Free exercise is with respect to government instituting a religious mandate. But for the case in point, business, unlike churches, cannot discriminate employment based on sex, race, or religion. You cannot have a "Jewish rules business", nor a "Christian rules business". You can have non-profits, but that is about the extent of it. Just because the owner is Jewish doesn't mean he gets to run his business based on his religious views, nor should he, unless we allow all businesses to do the same.

[jbylake]

Quote: Originally Posted by O|||||||O

I wonder how this will affect their prices?

Fire sale?

J.

[RyanLilly]

Quote: Originally Posted by battletone

Quote: Originally Posted by usayit

Kinda reminds me about the man who sued Hooters....

BH photo are run by Orthodox Jews (it does matter) which makes them specific targets for this type of lawsuits.

I am more concerned with the $7million.... fine.. if they are found liable... but $7million? Wow... our society and legal system has really stooped to the bottom.



Get rich quick.. find someone to sue. It is the American way.

But if they are not hiring any women sales people, then why should they be allowed to discriminate when others are not? I personally think privately owned businesses should be allowed to do anything they want, but they shouldn't get special treatment unless we reverse all discrimination laws. This is going to be a clear cut case...if they have women salesman, this lady has no case. If they don't, then they probably are breaking the law. It isn't a company with a handful of sales people is it? Sounds to me like they have enough employees that it would boarder on impossible to not accidentally find a qualified women for the position.

Quote: Originally Posted by RyanLilly

This will be an interesting one, as far as constitutional law is concerned, both parties positions seem to be protected by different sections of the constitution. B&H, will argue "free exercise clause" in and the plaintiffs can argue "equal protection clause."
Although, there is probably already precedence on situations like this.

How long do you think It would take to earn $7 million on the sales floor?

Free exercise is with respect to government instituting a religious mandate. But for the case in point, business, unlike churches, cannot discriminate employment based on sex, race, or religion. You cannot have a "Jewish rules business", nor a "Christian rules business". You can have non-profits, but that is about the extent of it. Just because the owner is Jewish doesn't mean he gets to run his business based on his religious views, nor should he, unless we allow all businesses to do the same.

Your probably right, but They could argue that the government mandating that they hire women, infringes upon their free exercise of religious practices. Though I wont claim to know anything about their religious beliefs of practices or traditions. I suppose it could be argued and hold up at least as good as the "Twinkie Defense"

[DennyCrane]

Quote: Originally Posted by battletone

Free exercise is with respect to government instituting a religious mandate. But for the case in point, business, unlike churches, cannot discriminate employment based on sex, race, or religion. You cannot have a "Jewish rules business", nor a "Christian rules business". You can have non-profits, but that is about the extent of it. Just because the owner is Jewish doesn't mean he gets to run his business based on his religious views, nor should he, unless we allow all businesses to do the same.

Not so fast...

Precedent exists with Muslim banks in America offering "Sharia banking services" that are "compatible with Islamic law".

What a jury will find is anyone's guess. Civil law and Constitutional law are 2 uniquely different animals and this case will boil down to which side can evoke more emotion in the jury towards their client. Let's just hope there's no namby-pamby judge.

Denny Crane. Coocoo for cocoa puffs.