Hostile La Vista, Baby
Hollywood Lawyer's Delicate Task: Making Harassment Claims Go Away

By: Alex Chun

Periodical: Los Angeles Daily Journal

Date: September 22, 1997

In 1994, Warner Bros. released a role-reversal film that stirred up a great deal of controversy as well as box-office revenue. The film featured Michael Douglas as an executive who received unwanted sexual advances from his boss, Demi Moore. But while the fictional relationship depicted in "Disclosure" was a big hit with audiences, movie studios have discovered that claims of real-life sexual harassment are far less entertaining.

Mirroring other businesses, the entertainment industry has seen a dramatic rise in sexual harassment cases since the 1991 Senate confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

And as in other businesses, the cost to settle has also gone up. Whereas it took just $10,000 to $20,000 to settle a sexual harassment case 10 years ago, today, lawyers say, most cases settle for between $100,000 and $150,000.

But where harassment claims are concerned, the entertainment industry isn't like other workplace settings. It features a unique set of rules, norms and subtle nuances that in many instances drives up settlement costs and complicates matters for even the most experienced employment attorneys.

According to employment law specialist Michael Robbins, the managing partner at Beverly Hills-based Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman, LLP, what sets the entertainment business apart from all others is the amount of publicity it receives and the fact that it is one of the few industries that legitimately deals with sex.

While claims of sexual harassment in the entertainment industry are no more prevalent than in any other industry, movie stars and studio executives make for very big targets.

Within the last six months, for example, Robbins was retained by a studio and production company to represent them on a claim that the male lead in their movie, which was about to premiere, was sexually harassing one of the female crew members.

"They [the plaintiff's lawyers] kept saying if they didn't get the thing settled, they were just going to serve the actor at the premiere," Robbins said.

Robbins declined to be more specific about the case, but he did note that the studio was concerned because the publicity from a sexual harassment suit might have a negative impact on the movie's box office receipts.

The case ultimately settled, with the plaintiff receiving less than what Robbins thought the case was worth. Nonetheless, it illustrates the superior bargaining position conferred on plaintiffs' attorneys, even where a claim has little merit.

"To some degree, it's a form of legalized extortion and some [studios] feel that they are better off settling than risking the potential exposure," said Lisa M. Jacobsen, the head of Rosenfeld Meyer's five-attorney labor and employment department.

At the same time, Jacobsen noted that some of her clients are very willing to defend cases they consider to be meritless. "They want to send a message that they aren't easy to sue and that it's not just a matter of getting in line for a check," she said. "Some are willing to fight to the bitter end."

Being in the spotlight does have one advantage, Robbins noted. Because of their status, celebrities have greater access to the media, and as a result, their side of the story has a better chance of getting out.

A few years ago, "The Price is Right" model Dian Parkinson accused her former boss, game show host Bob Barker, of coercing her into having sex with him. Through the media, Barker maintained that the sex was consensual.  In the end, Parkinson dropped her suit, citing Barker's powerful resources.

"He was out there swinging away, saying [Parkinson] was the one that came on to me, and I think that's what people remember," Robbins said of Barker.  His firm was not involved in the case.

In addition to its high-profile nature, another characteristic that distinguishes the entertainment industry from virtually all others is that it frequently deals with sex. R-, NC-17 and X-rated movies bring to the forefront issues that would be inappropriate in most other settings.

And where else but in the entertainment industry would a law firm be called in to counsel an animation company because a group of female illustrators objected to drawing big-breasted ducks for a television cartoon?

"In a factory, you [wouldn't] interview a female applicant and say take off your clothes and let's see what you've got," Robbins said. "But to some degree that's done in the entertainment industry because there are nude scenes.

"If you're going to do a love scene, you have to talk about coordinating the scene, and people are going to be talking about it before filming, during filming and after filming," he added. "The question is where do you stop, and the answer is you have to stop at some point, because at some point it [isn't] work-related anymore."

Along the same lines, another aspect of the entertainment industry that sets it apart, and which often leads to problems, is that joking about sex is more prevalent then in other fields, Jacobsen said.

"I did an investigation once and was speaking to various employees about a plaintiff's allegations and they said, 'Well, when she came here, she knew we joked about sex and she knew what she was getting into. We all do it, so what?'" Jacobsen said. "That's not a defense. If it's not work-related it's not a defense."

Robbins said the movie studios and production companies his firm represents have become more proactive in their effort to deal with harassment problems. Recently, a studio hired Rosenfeld Meyer to do something the firm had never done before: spend two hours training a single individual.

"He was a very high-level executive, and he didn't understand what all the fuss was about, but there were allegations [of sexual harassment] about him, and he didn't have a clue as to why [his behavior] was inappropriate," Robbins said. "Most companies would say 'Who needs the liability?' But he was valuable to them.

"So what they had us do is spend time mostly scaring him, letting him know that personal liability could be imposed -- so even if didn't understand, at least he would know where the line is. It's something that would only happen in the entertainment industry."

  Return to top