Murdochs to Fox News Chief Roger Ailes: Resign or Be Fired (Report)


#1

sfgate.com/entertainment/the-wrap/article/Murdochs-to-Fox-News-Chief-Roger-Ailes-Resign-or-8384620.php


#2

So, I guess he is a monster.


#3

If you want to dance, you have to pay the piper.


#4

Expensive to fire him if he hasn’t officially breached his employment contract.
But the Murdochs also know it will be expensive to keep him even if he hasn’t.

#trial_by_media


#5

I guess it is the golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules. I am sure Roger will do much better being fired than I will do working.


#6

I wonder which woman will get his job.:rolleyes:


#7

Most contracts have “morality” clauses that permit the employer to fire an employee who commit certain acts that harm the company’s reputation or expose it to lawsuits.


#8

Yep. And this law suit may automatically trigger such a clause.

IOW - even if he wins the case, the very fact he is under investigation might be sufficient to invoke that kind of a disrepute clause.


#9

And (powerful) men in business need to understand that, in addition to being scrupulously moral around their female colleagues - as they should - they ALSO must be seen to be above suspicion.

I would argue it’s the responsibility of such men to ensure there can simply be no possibility of innuendo or belated sexual harassment claims which frequently only come to light AFTER a female co-worker quits her job.

At the institutional/corporate level, any/all situations which might enable uncorroborated, unprovable, hearsay claims to arise, (where it’s “he said” “she said”) should be rendered impossible to occur. Not because such claims might be untrue or vexatious but because the company systematically prevents the possibility of sexual harassment.

Fired because you turned down your bosses’ sexual advances?

No! That should be rendered impossible in a company like Fox because their HR policies and procedures ought to eliminate and prevent any such potential conflict of interest. Take gender out of the equation and make it an all female committee of review that determines whether a FEMALE employee is meeting their performance targets.


#10

I officially believe that Ailes committed sexual harassment now.


#11

Oddly, I’ve seen some articles lately complaining that women’s careers suffer because bosses won’t meet with them without a third party present or invited to social functions thus they lose out on being “mentored” the way their male counterparts are.

This may be true, maybe women are hurt by not getting face time with the boss but one can hardly blame bosses for playing defense.

I think one problem with sexual harassment claims is that the victim may wait months or years before making a claim. It would be better if they complaine to HR in real time.


#12

I still think it is he said, she said. Unfortunately the Murduchs are acting in the best interest of their business, whether he did as charged or not. He is a genius in his field and he will be hard to replace. The whole thing is a terrible mess.


#13

I completely agree with you didymus.

I think mandatory reporting of suspected sexual harassment is an essential HR policy for corporations like Fox to have. Any failure to immediately report harassment of this sort facilitates and perpetuates the ongoing opportunity for further cases to arise. So it is obviously in the interests of the company to make it a condition of employment that employees must report any instance of sexual harassment - whether experienced firsthand or witnessed/suspected.

But more importantly, if an employee does not take sexual harassment seriously - concealing evidence - the presumption should be that their motive is something other than the welfare of other victims most of whom are women.

…and when I say ‘concealing evidence’ I mean waiting until after you have been fired for poor job performance.


#14

More here:

While Gretchen Carlson’s sexual-harassment lawsuit against Ailes sparked the investigation, sources say it has expanded into a wide-ranging inquiry into Ailes’s controversial management style. The interviews are now being conducted at Paul, Weiss’s midtown offices because of concerns that the Fox offices could be bugged, sources say. The lawyers are seeking to interview former female employees of Fox News in addition to current staff. They are also looking into the appropriateness of Ailes’s pressuring employees to speak out on his behalf, against his accusers. For instance, they are focusing on an op-ed written by Fox Business anchor Neil Cavuto in which Cavuto called the allegations against Ailes “sick.” As Cavuto is a manager at Fox News (his title is senior VP and managing editor), his comments could be seen as part of a corporate attempt to silence women who would speak out.

nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/murdochs-have-decided-to-remove-roger-ailes.html


#15

Why would Fox attempt to “silence women” who would speak out. :eek:


#16

this is an unexpected turn of events. I would think they would have to prove there was some merit to the lawsuit.


#17

If Ailes goes, I go. I probably won’t be the only one either.

The Murdochs’s need to stand up to Gretchen Carlson because she has no case.


#18

Exactly. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? :shrug:


#19

It’s hard not to be at least mildly cynical about big organizations. Will the next thing be Ailes filing an age discrimination suit against Fox? He’s 76, after all, and might not be all that productive himself nowadays.


#20

Corporations don’t follow the Constitution. They put their needs first.

My personal opinion is that the Murdoch sons have been looking for a way to get rid of Ailes since they took over. This is just the excuse to go in and find something.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.