DanielBenton Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 There are law firms that specialize in representing employers, and there are law firms that specialize in representing employees. They rarely do both. Kelley Drye is the former. Link to comment
Olga Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 28 minutes ago, Fleurfairy said: The cynical part of me thought that the Boals could have made these allegations when they saw an opportunity for Peter to be AD. Stranger things have happened. Possible, but impossible to know. One thing is clear though: making an allegation like this, which could destroy reputations and livelihood and which has harmed the institution, would necessarily have required some serious questioning on the part of ANY investigator. It strains credulity to think otherwise. At the very least, she is naieve, but worse motives could be imputed though we don’t know that. I find her conduct in this from start to finish (assuming we are finished) very odd and out of touch. Link to comment
aurora Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, Olga said: I find her conduct in this from start to finish (assuming we are finished) very odd and out of touch. Could you explain how so? Link to comment
Olga Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, aurora said: Could you explain how so? I think I did. To bring up a thirty year old event with no corroborating evidence ( my recollection is the person claimed to have “seen it” did not actually see it in full) and then to think her allegations would not be seriously questioned? Come on. And even corroborating evidenxe wiukd be seriously questioned. The company also had a duty to Martins, as it would to any employee against whom such charges were made, not to fire him or damage his reputation without serious review. Not to mention the possible harm to the company itself. And then to go to the press and complain her story was questioned? Of course it was! How could she think otherwise? Credibility is the pivot point. And then there is the issue Fleurfairy brought up of possible self interest. While I personally don’t think that is what motivated her (and I think Boal is out of the running because of this) if she made this charge in a lawsuit I suspect it would be used to attack her credibility. Again, to be clear, I personally don’t think the Boals did this to get Martins’ job but it is a possibility. At the least it would require more fuzzy thinking on their part. Link to comment
Helene Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 4 hours ago, miliosr said: Anything's possible but, if this whole sorry spectacle revealed anything, it has been that the board (a) had let too much power accrue to one person over the course of three decades, and (b) hadn't give much consideration as to what the post-Martins era would and should look like The SAB letter statement acknowledges this, Quote Therefore, in conjunction with the search for a successor to Mr. Martins, who retired from his positions with SAB and NYCB while the investigation was ongoing, the Boards will also evaluate the current responsibilities of the position to determine if changes to the structure of the role are also advisable. And it also says they are looking for a successor to Martins, which is no guarantee that they won't decide that they couldn't find anyone better. Link to comment
fondoffouettes Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 hours ago, atm711 said: How is Ms Hoey's name pronounced?...it should be hoo-ee! LOL! This whole thing stinks of a cover up for the sake of NYCB's self-preservation (especially in terms of its board and administration.) Why would a current company dancer have reported (anonymously) to the NYT that Martins shook his fist over her head a week or so before she was promoted? I guess she and everyone else was just lying? Seems unlikely. Link to comment
sandik Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 4 hours ago, nanushka said: He might. But his supporters might not. That could definitely be a major factor in that complexity. I'm worried for the company. I think we're all worried. Link to comment
Helene Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 hours ago, Fleurfairy said: The cynical part of me thought that the Boals could have made these allegations when they saw an opportunity for Peter to be AD. Stranger things have happened. The people who profit most from this report are on the Board: it likely shields them from any lack of oversight. And there's no pressure for them to go anywhere, like Martins did. If anything, the opposite is more likely: that by raising her voice, Kelly Boal has nixed any chance of Boal being selected for the position, even if he wanted it. For one, no one likes whistleblowers, and given the amount of support on the NYCB -- who don't have to go anywhere, since the report absolves them -- she and Boal are now poisonous. There's another factor, in my opinion: Kelly Boal describes demeaning behavior by Martins towards Peter Boal in the studio. That shows him to be weak towards the alpha male, and that's almost as unforgivable as being a whistleblower. Look at Ekaterina Novikova's obvious relief expressed in the interview aired before the Romeo and Juliet HD at Vaziev taken over the Bolshoi job: Vaziev is as alpha as anyone, even alpha enough to counter Grigorovich's influence and supporters. Link to comment
abatt Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 14 hours ago, Balletwannabe said: His recent DUI isn't helping his reputation. Huge difference between a DUI with no injuries and being accused of sexual and physical abuse of employees. Link to comment
Balletwannabe Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 14 minutes ago, abatt said: Huge difference between a DUI with no injuries and being accused of sexual and physical abuse of employees. I was adding to the conversation; not comparing the two. Link to comment
On Pointe Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Is there anything to be learned from this? Besides the obvious - launching and publicizing an investigation against a person in a position of power, based upon an anonymous accusation, is probably not a good idea. Peter Martins is not really exonerated, as his past bad behavior has been brought to public attention once again. Darci Kistler has been humiliated through no fault of her own, while having to deal with her daughter's serious substance abuse problem. Dancers who were secure in their career arcs have to start over with "the devil they don't know". And the NYCB board has the unenviable task of finding a new AD who won't be run out of the city on a rail by the critics and the fans. As the current tenant in the White House would put it - sad. Link to comment
vipa Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 13 minutes ago, On Pointe said: Is there anything to be learned from this? Besides the obvious - launching and publicizing an investigation against a person in a position of power, based upon an anonymous accusation, is probably not a good idea. Peter Martins is not really exonerated, as his past bad behavior has been brought to public attention once again. Darci Kistler has been humiliated through no fault of her own, while having to deal with her daughter's serious substance abuse problem. Dancers who were secure in their career arcs have to start over with "the devil they don't know". And the NYCB board has the unenviable task of finding a new AD who won't be run out of the city on a rail by the critics and the fans. As the current tenant in the White House would put it - sad. For better or for worse, I won't bother to point out the issues, if the accusations hadn't come at this moment in time the whole thing would have been handled differently. It is a complicated thing to think through. Link to comment
KayDenmark Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 It's also interesting to me to see how the media has handled the release of this report. The Washington Post ran several long, bylined pieces about the accusations, but only a short wire service piece about the release of the report supposedly clearing Martins. Both the Dance Magazine write-up and the NYTimes piece about the report seemed highly skeptical of the idea that Martins could be cleared. I haven't seen *any* other coverage of the release of the report - and I have a Google News Alert turned on for Martins specifically because I am interested in this case. (I've received several notifications of tiny developments in his DWI case.) Dozens of pieces containing accusations but hardly any pieces reporting (so-called) exoneration? Doesn't seem balanced, and seems to suggest an agenda. Link to comment
vipa Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I wonder about something else. Whenever I read Peter Martins name in a story about the company, even if it isn't specifically about the accusations, the article says something like - Peter Martins, former director who resigned because of allegations of sexual harassment and violence ..... Often the article will add something about the the Darci claim of spousal abuse (that was later dropped) and his DUI. How long will it be before he can be mentioned merely as Peter Martins, former director? Link to comment
nanushka Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 48 minutes ago, vipa said: I wonder about something else. Whenever I read Peter Martins name in a story about the company, even if it isn't specifically about the accusations, the article says something like - Peter Martins, former director who resigned because of allegations of sexual harassment and violence ..... Often the article will add something about the the Darci claim of spousal abuse (that was later dropped) and his DUI. How long will it be before he can be mentioned merely as Peter Martins, former director? To put the question a bit differently, when does it stop being considered "newsworthy" that that's the reason he resigned? Rightly or wrongly, I'd guess that'll be quite some time yet. Link to comment
Vs1 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 On 2/19/2018 at 9:41 PM, On Pointe said: Is there anything to be learned from this? Besides the obvious - launching and publicizing an investigation against a person in a position of power, based upon an anonymous accusation, is probably not a good idea. Peter Martins is not really exonerated, as his past bad behavior has been brought to public attention once again. Darci Kistler has been humiliated through no fault of her own, while having to deal with her daughter's serious substance abuse problem. Dancers who were secure in their career arcs have to start over with "the devil they don't know". And the NYCB board has the unenviable task of finding a new AD who won't be run out of the city on a rail by the critics and the fans. As the current tenant in the White House would put it - sad. Except everyone here says sue for age and sexual harassment, go to the union, be fair employers, etc..... So you agree no one can achieve fairness or justice, or should not try to, or don't rock the boat, or the rich and powerful should make an example out of a peasant, or do you think one should seek to stand up and be fair and just? Link to comment
Vs1 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 On 2/16/2018 at 10:53 AM, Olga said: Possible, but impossible to know. One thing is clear though: making an allegation like this, which could destroy reputations and livelihood and which has harmed the institution, would necessarily have required some serious questioning on the part of ANY investigator. It strains credulity to think otherwise. At the very least, she is naieve, but worse motives could be imputed though we don’t know that. I find her conduct in this from start to finish (assuming we are finished) very odd and out of touch. Well, naive people have been used. Is he accused of quid pro quo threats or favoritism or touching during dance or affairs (not prohibited, even as an employment issue then). I don't know what "abuse" means vs. "Harassment" (i.e. money differential, quid pro quo, task differentiation, etc.) Link to comment
On Pointe Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 6 hours ago, Vs1 said: Except everyone here says sue for age and sexual harassment, go to the union, be fair employers, etc..... So you agree no one can achieve fairness or justice, or should not try to, or don't rock the boat, or the rich and powerful should make an example out of a peasant, or do you think one should seek to stand up and be fair and just? I don't agree with any of that. If you are abused, harassed or mistreated in any way by a supervisor or colleague, you should document the instances and take every step to seek justice. But anonymous claims of improper behavior, without specific names or dates, should not trigger an investigation. There was tons of contemporaneous evidence against Weinstein, Lauer, Dutoit, Rose, Spacey and others. Martins is definitely not a perfect person, but the case against him reeked of sour grapes and score settling. Link to comment
vipa Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 1 hour ago, On Pointe said: I don't agree with any of that. If you are abused, harassed or mistreated in any way by a supervisor or colleague, you should document the instances and take every step to seek justice. But anonymous claims of improper behavior, without specific names or dates, should not trigger an investigation. There was tons of contemporaneous evidence against Weinstein, Lauer, Dutoit, Rose, Spacey and others. Martins is definitely not a perfect person, but the case against him reeked of sour grapes and score settling. Yes, I definitely think it is a problem in the Martins case that so many voices reached the news, being viewed as newsworthy. I don't want to be misunderstood. Anyone who is truly mistreated should have an avenue for regress. On the other hand, vague accusations of favoritism in casting or interpretations of advise about to get promoted are unworthy of news coverage IMO. It seemed that many dissatisfied dancers jumped on the band wagon. Fact is most dancers don't get the roles they want, and most dancers don't get promoted. Sometime young people with promise don't fulfill that promise. Link to comment
Drew Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, vipa said: Fact is most dancers don't get the roles they want, and most dancers don't get promoted. Sometime young people with promise don't fulfill that promise. Absolutely. Speaking generally still: it's also the case that there can be unfairness and bad leadership and peculiar taste that still don't rise to the level of fire-able offense or illegality. And that organizations may weigh such problems against a leader's successes even when they do see the problems. Which they often don't. (Though...uh...in my experience when passionate fans see a talented dancer they admire not getting promoted, they are not always all that philosophical about it .) Edited February 22, 2018 by Drew Link to comment
Jayne Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Or... we will look back in 20 years and think of the accusers in the same way we think of Anita Hill today. Link to comment
Vs1 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, On Pointe said: I don't agree with any of that. If you are abused, harassed or mistreated in any way by a supervisor or colleague, you should document the instances and take every step to seek justice. But someone said earlier nobody likes a whistleblower(except those who call them heroes) and who would choose that risk without reward? Also, why Relive a horror? Why is it anyone's business? Also,what does Cosby have to do with Peter? Was peter accused of rape? So why does a lack of police report in peter's case, or most harassment cases(which are civil) mean something? Likewise, The absence of Eeoc or hr report has no bearing in many offices where it does not apply by law and fact. as for sour grapes by bad dancers, no one could call gelsey a bad dancer. I don't know about the other dancers. Who by definition who leaves a job for any reason other than family or opportunity is not unhappy for whatever reason and by definition disgruntled? Why does that prove she was a bad dancer or lying? Edited February 22, 2018 by Vs1 Modify Link to comment
dirac Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 11 hours ago, Jayne said: Or... we will look back in 20 years and think of the accusers in the same way we think of Anita Hill today. Somehow I don’t think Kelly Boal, Peter Ostrovsky, and Vanessa Carlton are going to be up there with Hill. Quote Kelly Boal describes demeaning behavior by Martins towards Peter Boal in the studio. That shows him to be weak towards the alpha male, and that's almost as unforgivable as being a whistleblower. Peter Boal is unlikely to get the job, and I’ll wager he wanted it, but “We’re not going to hire him because he’s a weenie,” probably won’t be high on the list of reasons. After all, he’s currently running a largish company successfully. Link to comment
Kellyaire Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 Greetings, I don't see Darci Kistler listed on the SAB.org faculty page. Does anyone know of an official announcement of her departing the faculty? thank you! Link to comment
California Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 7 hours ago, Kellyaire said: Greetings, I don't see Darci Kistler listed on the SAB.org faculty page. Does anyone know of an official announcement of her departing the faculty? thank you! They have not yet removed her bio page, but perhaps that will happen soon: https://www.sab.org/school/faculty/darci_kistler.php Link to comment
Recommended Posts