Nasty sexual assault lawsuit against Westjet

[dagger]

March 7, 2016 

Lawyer considers class-action suit in alleged WestJet sexual assault case 

By GLORIA GALLOWAY 

Sean Herm, the lawyer for the former WestJet flight attendant Mandalena Lewis, says a potential class action suit would include other women lodging similar complaints against the company 

The lawyer for a former WestJet flight attendant who alleges the airline failed to protect her from being sexually assaulted by a pilot says he is contemplating turning her suit into a class action that would include other women lodging similar complaints against the company.

"We are certainly considering it," said Sean Hern, the lawyer for Mandalena Lewis, who filed a statement of claim against WestJet in the Supreme Court of British Columbia last week.

"It just depends on how many women there are and what their circumstances would be," Mr. Hern said Monday. "It's something that certainly is on the radar."

A representative of the WestJet Professional Flight Attendants Association said additional women have "come forward" with allegations of assault to representatives of the union, which has yet to be certified. They have been referred to Mr. Hern, said the man, who did not want to be identified because of concerns about his own employment.

Mr. Hern would not confirm that he had discussed the case with other potential complainants, saying, "I don't talk about people who talk to me."

Ms. Lewis alleges in her statement of claim that the airline failed to protect her from being sexually assaulted by a pilot who was known to have assaulted another woman, that its officials did not discipline her alleged assailant, and that she was fired when she tried to find out how the company had responded to her complaint. None of the allegations has been proven in court.

WestJet officials say the company will "vigorously" defend itself against Ms. Lewis's claim. Company spokeswoman Lauren Stewart said on Monday that the company has not been contacted by other employees who are alleging assault.

Gregg Saretsky, WestJet's president, said in an online statement late last week that the safety of his employees is something he does not take lightly and that sexual assault is a serious matter.

Investigations of Ms. Lewis's allegations of sexual assault, and those of the second flight attendant, were conducted and subsequently closed, said Mr. Saretsky, but they are now being reviewed to ensure that they were diligently conducted and that no new information has come to light.

Emma Pullman, a strategist with SumOfUs.org, an international consumer watchdog, said that, over the weekend, 17,000 people signed her group's petition urging Mr. Saretsky to resign and calling on the company to enforce its policies on sexual harassment and assault. About 10,000 identified themselves as WestJet customers, Ms. Pullman said.

According to Ms. Lewis's statement of claim, a man referred to as Pilot M sexually assaulted her in 2010 during a layover in Hawaii. She says she reported the assault to WestJet officials but, rather than discipline or fire Pilot M, she was told "not to speak of the sexual assault to anyone else, out of concern for the pilot's privacy."

The claim says Ms. Lewis learned last year that another flight attendant complained to WestJet in 2008 of being assaulted by the same pilot. Ms. Lewis argues in her statement of claim that, had the company responded appropriately to that allegation, her own assault would not have occurred.

The court document goes on to say Ms. Lewis was fired in January of this year for "insubordination" based on the swear word contained in an e-mail she wrote to WestJet officials and a disconnected call to a WestJet manager that she had inadvertently dialled.

Ms. Stewart, the WestJet spokeswoman, said both Pilot M and the flight attendant who complained about being assaulted in 2008 have been take of the flight schedule while the company reviews the investigations it conducted into the alleged assaults. She would not say whether the two employees are being paid while they are grounded.

 

[Seeker]

6 hours ago, dagger said:

The nub of the Westjet issue are these questions:

Dagger, you forgot one question:

10.  How many millions will the complainant be awarded?

 

[inchman]

8 hours ago, mo32a said:

Anyone that doesn't believe the same behaviour has taken place in every major, or for that matter minor airline, is deceiving themselves.

Christmas parties at lots of companies no longer exist because of the problems that occurred.

I wouldn't be jumping too hard on WJ right now, I can see the same thing happening anywhere, Rouge would be my first guess as to the next litigants.

It doesn't matter what the corporate culture is, you mix men and women, away from home, alcohol, and perhaps youth and you will have the same situation, maybe even it is consensual at first, and maybe nobody says anything the first time or two, but when they see something like this in the news, well it's off to the lawyer.

 

There is no doubt there is fraternization and even some aggressive behaviour occurs between employees at any company, airline or not. 

The issue in this case is how the employer handled it when it was reported. It would appear, in this case, that the young lady decided to press the issue with the company only after finding out that the company was covering up her case and others, then decided to go to a lawyer after she was fired with little cause.

I would suggest that she didn't react as you characterize it at all.

[dagger]

2 hours ago, seeker said:

Dagger, you forgot one question:

10.  How many millions will the complainant be awarded?

 

That's an outcome, I am focussing on the issues leading up to potential outcomes. That said, if she can persuade a judge or jury that she was abused, that's one level of damages to be assessed. If a failure to treat her case with all due seriousness can be shown, that's another level of damages to be assessed because it had an impact on her health. And if the company covered up Pilot M's behaviour, I submit that might not add much to her damages, but could fuel a large award in a class action suit. 

[mo32a]

14 hours ago, inchman said:

There is no doubt there is fraternization and even some aggressive behaviour occurs between employees at any company, airline or not. 

The issue in this case is how the employer handled it when it was reported. It would appear, in this case, that the young lady decided to press the issue with the company only after finding out that the company was covering up her case and others, then decided to go to a lawyer after she was fired with little cause.

I would suggest that she didn't react as you characterize it at all.

I didn't characterize her at all, I'm talking about the next company.

That's why I said not to pile on WestJet in a gloating manner, it can happen anywhere and then we will find out how it well that company handles it.

[DEFCON]

And where's the quid pro quo for all the negativity to be found if the Court ultimately finds the gal is a nut-bar that never deserved any more consideration than management provided?

We had one of these situations occur many years ago. The gal accused, the pilot was suspended with pay, the police were involved, criminal charges were laid and reputations destroyed, but when it the dust finally settled, the complainant agreed she needed 'help' with personal issues.

  

[internet]

The next Union drive succeeds because of this. 

[dagger]

1 hour ago, DEFCON said:

And where's the quid pro quo for all the negativity to be found if the Court ultimately finds the gal is a nut-bar that never deserved any more consideration than management provided?

We had one of these situations occur many years ago. The gal accused, the pilot was suspended with pay, the police were involved, criminal charges were laid and reputations destroyed, but when it the dust finally settled, the complainant agreed she needed 'help' with personal issues.

  

We'll deal with the outcomes when they are known, but if there are multiple cases against Pilot M, and there seem to be, then there is a likelihood that his behaviour was at the very least harassment. Whether that is sufficient to stand up to the legal standards for harassment is another thing. But I don't know who Pilot M is, wouldn't recognize him, so to this point, this is something largely known to those within the company.

 

I also find some of you too easily slip into the mode of blaming and shaming the woman, even suggesting that maybe she is a woman scorned, or someone who took an innocent advance and turned it into a feminist cause. Frankly, I wonder how some of you male pilots would react if a male captain grabbed you an throw you on your stomach on a bed and tried to pull down your pants. I bet you'd come out of that experience feeling pretty angry and or depressed at the victimization to which you'd been suggested. I doubt some of you would have the courage to admit a man preyed on you. It took a lot for the male victims of priest abuse to come forward, too.

[CanadaEH]

I hope that there's a lesson to be learned from all of this. Right or wrong. 
It's a shame that it had to come to this, though. 

[blues deville]

5 hours ago, CanadaEH said:

I hope that there's a lesson to be learned from all of this. Right or wrong. 
It's a shame that it had to come to this, though. 

You're absolutely correct. It is a shame. Is it the result of a poorly trained 2006 Westjet HR department or something more serious? 

[boestar]

This sort of thing is very common.  the difference is that we rarely hear about it because the policies and processes within the company are clear and deal with the issue correctly and transparently.  This stuff only sees the light of day when the process is not followed and one party feels like their concerns are going unchecked as is the case here.

Had this been properly dealt with we would even know it happened.

Someone above mentioned that problems like this are usually larger company issues and I disagree with that.  I think issues where things are swept under the rug so to speak are largely more common at smaller companies.  Mainly due to the familiarity between the employee levels.  As they say familiarity breeds contempt.

As for this case we will have to wait for the outcome.

[DEFCON]

Dagger

My positions aren't taken to blame, or otherwise castigate the woman involved in this case, she may have a completely legitimate claim, but for the moment I'm hoping to temper calls for the head of the accused and those on the periphery until the accusations being advanced are legitimately substantiated and not based on the circumstantial and sensationalistic noise that propels media ratings.

When accusations such as these are made, the vile nature of the claims frequently result in explosive public reactions that have a tendency to take on a life of their own. Investigations into these matters are often long, undertaken in secret and the following Court proceedings can continue on ad nauseam, but for those summarily convicted in the media, the long and painfully slow march towards a resolution is nothing but painful. 

Innuendo can be instantly destructive to everything an accused was prior and leave him / her / them damaged and maybe even destitute early in the process. If and when the system finally does get around to a reaching a final determination, the suit could be withdrawn anywhere along the way too, it'll already be too late for the accused. Damage to the reputation of the accused parties was pretty much instant in the present case, but should the actions of the plaintiff 'ultimately' be determined to be malicious and or unfounded, there will be little in the way of recourse available to the damaged parties.

As an aside, I thought the man to man sexual assault was interesting by comparison and the kind of thing I wouldn't normally consider. I don't know how others might respond to an assault of that nature and I'm going out on a limb by guessing, but resolution might be undertaken in a different fashion, one that some might consider to be the more appropriate approach, but hey, who knows?

 

 

[dagger]

19 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

 

As an aside, I thought the man to man sexual assault was interesting by comparison and the kind of thing I wouldn't normally consider. I don't know how others might respond to an assault of that nature and I'm going out on a limb by guessing, but resolution might be undertaken in a different fashion, one that some might consider to be the more appropriate approach, but hey, who knows?

 

 

If what you are implying is vigilante justice, you're either describing a situation that could lead to arrests for assault, or a catastrophic confrontation in the cockpit. Really, you don't want to tiptoe through those tulips as an airline.

[DEFCON]

You can be sure the last thing a straight guy would want is to be dragged into a public show involving homosexual behaviour, but yes, the airline would not want to try tiptoeing through that kind of tulip patch either.

[Seeker]

10 hours ago, dagger said:

I also find some of you too easily slip into the mode of blaming and shaming the woman, even suggesting that maybe she is a woman scorned, or someone who took an innocent advance and turned it into a feminist cause. Frankly, I wonder how some of you male pilots would react if a male captain grabbed you an throw you on your stomach on a bed and tried to pull down your pants. I bet you'd come out of that experience feeling pretty angry and or depressed at the victimization to which you'd been suggested. I doubt some of you would have the courage to admit a man preyed on you. It took a lot for the male victims of priest abuse to come forward, too.

There is a woman in my immediate family that was sexually assaulted and I know for a fact that she did nothing at all to bring this upon herself.  This knowledge along with the displeasure of meeting and knowing some slimeball opportunist mysogynists over the years makes me very sympathetic and I do not default to blaming and shaming.  There is however a big difference between wondering about the facts being presented and the motivations of the people involved and saying she had it coming because she was wearing a miniskirt. Really, isn't this what the courts will eventually do? 

I find your example of a male on male situation to be disingenuous.  If a man was to approach me with a sexual offer I'd say, sorry pal, you're barking up the wrong tree.  If a man was to grab me and assault me, in a sexual manner or not, he's going to get a physical response.  I'm not likely to feel victimized in the same way, or to the same degree, as a woman would in that situation.  Their reaction and subsequent feelings would be different.  Valid, but different.  Your mention of priests and male victims is completely off-topic.  The problem there wasn't because it was a male priest and and male victim but because it was an adult and a minor.

[CanadaEH]

5 hours ago, seeker said:

That's an interesting comment from someone who works there.  Are you saying you believe that it didn't happen or didn't happen as described and is a ploy to drive the union vote? Is this sentiment shared by others?  Maybe you're saying it did happen as described but is being pulled out in to the public at this time to help the union vote?

I deleted my comment. I shouldn't be adding to the speculation. I know nothing of this incident, how it was handled, who is or isn't guilty, and why it's been brought up now. 

[CanadaEH]

4 hours ago, blues deville said:

You're absolutely correct. It is a shame. Is it the result of a poorly trained 2006 Westjet HR department or something more serious? 

I have no idea. I only hope that there are lessons to be learned that will prevent something like this from happening again. 

[blues deville]

54 minutes ago, CanadaEH said:

I have no idea. I only hope that there are lessons to be learned that will prevent something like this from happening again. 

Agreed. And the sooner Westjet gets going on their response to these allegations the better. 

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, blues deville said:

Agreed. And the sooner Westjet gets going on their response to these allegations the better. 

I suspect since the matter is the subject of a civil suit, we will not see anything more from WestJet at this time.

[Seeker]

48 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

I suspect since the matter is the subject of a civil suit, we will not see anything more from WestJet at this time.

You might not see anything but doesn't mean things aren't happening behind the scenes.

[Airband]

Pretty safe bet there will be something out in the next two weeks.

[moeman]

9 hours ago, blues deville said:

You're absolutely correct. It is a shame. Is it the result of a poorly trained 2006 Westjet HR department or something more serious? 

What's telling, to me, is that in 2015/2016 she was stonewalled by what I assume is the same department when trying to access to her files. Why would they do that?

[blues deville]

1 hour ago, moeman said:

What's telling, to me, is that in 2015/2016 she was stonewalled by what I assume is the same department when trying to access to her files. Why would they do that?

A good question and one which should be asked in the courtroom.

[blues deville]

7 hours ago, Rich Pulman said:

I'll eat a veggie burger if this sees the inside of a courtroom. 

Are you suggesting WS will settle out of court and make this go away?

Meanwhile, some recent news from Maui.

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/maui-prosecutors-waiting-to-serve-westjet-pilot-with-summons-1.2809549

[blues deville]

41 minutes ago, Rich Pulman said:

Yes. Cash and a non-disclosure agreement for the plaintiff(s), and a roster full of OGG flights for "Pilot M". It's their cheapest and least embarrassing solution.

Well that is certainly possible and perhaps best case scenario.