Finlay Resigns, Catazaro and Ramasar Suspended -- Update: Catazaro and Ramasar Fired

[Olga]

To me, the major result of having used the company server, if they did, is that the company in conducting its “investigation” would have had access to emails even without going to a third party. I don’t think the no expectation of privacy rule means the company has a duty to read everyone’s emails etc. But it sounds like they were texting which as pointed out upthread is different. 

[yukionna4869]

3 minutes ago, Olga said:

To me, the major result of having used the company server, if they did, is that the company in conducting its “investigation” would have had access to emails even without going to a third party. I don’t think the no expectation of privacy rule means the company has a duty to read everyone’s emails etc. But it sounds like they were texting which as pointed out upthread is different.  

Oh yes. If they used an email service hosted by the company, then the company would have copies of those e-mails for sure. I don't think it's been stated in the complaint that they did. I can't imagine Merson would omit that information in the facts of the case.

Edited to add:
Unless the company server somehow encrypts the e-mails it stores like Apple does. With Apple, the data they store is encrypted as well, so not even Apple knows what data is there. This is to guard against people who hack into their cloud services. The company could be using a third party e-mail server, as well.

Edited September 9, 2018 by yukionna4869
more tech info

[Rock]

9 hours ago, Helene said:

Way for Bouder to throw the interim team under the bus.

When a dancer transitions to the position of a ballet master, it can take some time for their peers to accept them in their new position. Someone who used to dance next to you is now in the front of the room and you're supposed to listen to what they have to say. Difficult. Same with the NYCB's interim team. Those people were all very recently dancers in the company. While Bouder's comments are tiresome, they're also typical. 

[Olga]

21 minutes ago, balanchinefreak said:

@Olga, you don't need the authority of an AD to tell an employee don't come to work drunk or we suspend you.  If you violate a 2nd time, you are fired. 

I don’t disagree on this narrow point.

Actually, even that narrow point may be wrong given disability regulations and the fact he is a union member. 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Olga

[cinnamonswirl]

NIED is negligent infliction of emotional distress and IIED is intentional infliction of emotional distress. Waterbury's NIED and IIED claims have a twist because they are indirect -- it wasn't NYCB that took the actions that caused her distress. Usually these claims are direct (like her claims against Finlay).

A couple of people have asked me very specific questions that I don't feel comfortable answering off the top of my head. My posts have been based on my initial reaction to the complaint (issue spotting it, if you will). I haven't looked at case law or even the relevant statutes so I think I need to stop answering such specific questions. 

I don't think merely doing something on company time would give rise to liability if they were on personal devices using personal phone numbers.  Even if they were on company Wifi, I'm not sure the company has the duty to actively monitor Wifi use for improper activity (if that's even possible). Using company Wifi won't go through the company's server. Certainly if they used company email or devices that would be very different and I would have expected the complaint to state that.

[bcash]

12 hours ago, rkoretzky said:

I was at the Saturday matinee at SPAC when Chase made his debut performance in Apollo. He was promoted on the spot. 

It was a stunner. He captured the arc with great clarity. I will never forget it. 

Unfortunately injuries intervened and I never saw him rise to that level again. 

I wish I had been able to witness those early years of his rising stardom. The last performance I saw him in was the DAAG this past Spring where his uneven partnering of Mearns was discussed on this board. Still his upper body carriage was distinctive and superior to most of the other men on stage.

The one before that, if I remember correctly, was Duo Concertante with Bouder.  Even in this "lighter" piece, his stage presence and moments of wit were much more befitting of a principal than the bland, and tentative performance Russell Janzen gave later in the season. 

I'm inclined to separate the art from the artist, or the artist from the social person, though I don't hold it as some fundamental principle. Still, given what I know now, if there would be performances scheduled tomorrow and a choice between Finlay and say, Janzen, I would still buy tickets to the Finlay one. 

Catazaro has yet to impress as a principal dancer, nor an excellent partner. He's good friends with Finlay and they are of similar height, with conventionally appealing physiques. But if you put them side by side, the difference is evident as daylight. 

Ramasar is justly well-liked by audiences, bringing much to many pieces in the NYCB repertoire, and I hope the Broadway stint will invigorate and deepen his dancing even more, when/if he returns next year.

Edited September 9, 2018 by bcash

[fondoffouettes]

41 minutes ago, Rock said:

When a dancer transitions to the position of a ballet master, it can take some time for their peers to accept them in their new position. Someone who used to dance next to you is now in the front of the room and you're supposed to listen to what they have to say. Difficult. Same with the NYCB's interim team. Those people were all very recently dancers in the company. While Bouder's comments are tiresome, they're also typical. 

Bouder's comments could also be true; it's possible the situation grew worse after the interim team took over. Tiler Peck basically implied that the company has been running on autopilot in this recent NYT profile:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/arts/dance/tiler-peck-ballet-now-documentary.html 

I didn't expect someone like Peck to be so outspoken; she seems like the type to not ruffle feathers. 

I must admit that my immediate reaction to Bouder's post was that I didn't think it was fair to pin this all on the interim team. The complaint cites image-sharing that occurred in September 2017, when Martins was still ballet master in chief, in addition to image-sharing in May 2018.

Edited September 9, 2018 by fondoffouettes

[Rock]

I think it's clear the company isn't running on autopilot, but the areas in Chase Finley's behavior where the interim team doesn't seem to have taken a strong enough stance is coming into the theatre drunk and damaging several floors of a hotel. He probably should have been suspended immediately until he'd completed some kind of rehab. 

[Helene]

Reminder:  the discussion of what is written in comments to articles and social media is limited to ballet professionals.  While this can include members of a ballet board, which is an oversight role, it does not include non-board donors or other respondents that aren't ballet professionals.  References to non-ballet professionals have been removed.  

This does not include general statements, like "Things are heating up on XYZ's Instagram" or "Lots of wedding congratulations on ABC's [public-facing] Facebook."  Then people can run to those accounts and see what's happening.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Helene
Grammar

[Longtimelurker]

1 hour ago, balanchinefreak said:

@Olga, you don't need the authority of an AD to tell an employee don't come to work drunk or we suspend you.  If you violate a 2nd time, you are fired. 

We don’t know what if any action was taken if and when management knew about a substance abuse problem. The company does not publicly disclose every disciplinary action. 

[On Pointe]

33 minutes ago, Rock said:

I think it's clear the company isn't running on autopilot, but the areas in Chase Finley's behavior where the interim team doesn't seem to have taken a strong enough stance is coming into the theatre drunk and damaging several floors of a hotel. He probably should have been suspended immediately until he'd completed some kind of rehab. 

When some random rock act invites groupies to a party and trashes a hotel room,  you hear about it in the media.  Waterbury's complaint references Finlay and others supposedly  being fined $150,000 for something similar,  but I can't find any reference to it.  One would think that given the rarity of a prestige organization's members being involved that there would be a readily accessible news item somewhere.  Does anyone know the particulars?  I still don't  believe a few dancers could inflict that much damage,  no matter how wasted they might have been.

[balanchinefreak]

2 hours ago, Olga said:

I don’t disagree on this narrow point.

Actually, even that narrow point may be wrong given disability regulations and the fact he is a union member. 

It did occur to me that union rules govern these situations, but I didn't have time to amend.

Stafford might have done all he could. I like him (in fact, he's my choice to run the company, not that my vote matters) and hope that he comes out of this unscathed.

If it's true that underage girls were involved - that's a big deal.

Not to minimize everything else, but when you cross the territory into underage kids... we are talking about felony.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Kaysta said:

Why is the process to find a replacement taking so long?  I get that it is a major decision, but they must have several applicants in mind whom they want to interview.  Frankly, I’m shocked that this has gone as long as it has, though I admit I have no idea how these hiring processes go.  

 

1. The circumstances that have prompted the search. 

2. It is a behemoth organization with many moving parts and includes oversight of the School of American Ballet. 

3. The pool of qualified candidates is incredibly small compared to other professions. 

[Helene]

FYI: There is another thread to discuss the job posting, which includes interesting comments on the timing and the position, but not in the context of the suspensions:

https://balletalert.invisionzone.com/topic/44026-job-posting-for-artistic-director/

In my experience in large non-for-profits (400 people) and corporations, including Fortune 100 and 500 companies, while there is no expectation of privacy, and, sometimes, a statement that the company owned everything using their equipment, email addresses, and bandwidth, almost all but high-level, general monitoring is/has been retroactive/reactive. Normally, the companies and organizations did not monitor specifics of emails, Skype for Business/other PM services, texts using company phones, or wifi proactively: they monitored in the general sense, like noting where activity crosses a very large threshold, at which point, they might dig deeper to investigate, and it usually started with hardware.  If, however, there was a heads up or suspicion, or a subpoena, or a restraining order, or law enforcement got involved in any way, then there were specific company policies, including a sign-off hierarchy, to go deeper or to start specific monitoring to trap suspicious activity.  Sometimes the courts became involved.In addition, I worked for a company that had a quiz example for a training model that asked whether a personal email sent via the company email was a violation of company policy.  The answer was that they expected a limited number of personal emails to go using the company email address. In that company, it was an explicit policy. So, no, outside of a high-security, tightly-regulated organization, even company emails or using company wifi for private emails among company members, donors, and employees wouldn't have raised a red flag, even if they had attachments. 

Even on this message board, none of the Admins can see what is in any of your PM's; if there was a legal request for them, that would go through the people who host our website and its services.  We only see PM content if someone forwards a PM to us with a complaint about PM abuse, which has been very, very rare in the last 15 years.

As far as what the interim team can do, they, primarily, are artistic administrators.  Typically, and especially in an organization that large, HR issues are handled through administration, with possible involvement of the Board, and, depending on the importance/policy, vetted by lawyers.  It is not as simple as "Show up drunk for class twice, and, 'Heraus!'" If it doesn't want to be sued or have a union or NLRB action against it, a company/org may have to prove specific alcohol levels, there may be precedence or policy for the option to allow the person to be evaluated, offered rehab, the context may be taken into consideration, like the company gala or a holiday the night before, different tracks for different levels of violations, etc. etc.  And there's probably even a process other than automatic firing if the person who is drunk endangers someone in the process, like driving while intoxicated, operating heavy machinery, having a job-related weapon, or dropping a colleague.  Plus, in an union environment, that could add additional layers of process, notification, etc.  Generally the stuff that day-to-day managers or even their managers don't have the time or expertise to process.  They may have the explicit responsibility of notification, but, even if they wanted and/or recommended a specific outcome, they may not have the authority to snap their fingers and make it happen.

Since dancers are on such short contracts (in NA), it is generally easier to stop casting and let a contract run out or to accept an early resignation.  ("Since I have no roles in the last rep, I decided to open my food truck next month, and my last performance is in two weeks.") It is very rare to hear about a mid-season suspension, let alone firing. 

As far as timing, typically, a succession plan is based on the well-oiled machine theory, and, if you're lucky, Plans B and C for crises and/or replacing a singular, especially a charismatic leader. Unless it's a volatile industry, the plans/risk descriptions I've seen address typical crises:  the plane crash, the sudden illness, and industry-specific situations, for example, in the tech world, that the person will leave and start their own company with little notice or transition.  Generally, there aren't plans for internal crises like the media triggering a board-sponsored internal investigation against Martins and the Martins resignation, which, in itself, gave the company more to consider and add to the job description for and choice of Martins' successor(s), which could lead to a very different job description, org structure, and/or decision hierarchy.  (Although I've never seen plans in the banking or finance industry, which may include these kinds of crises.)

A long process can be very tactical, to avoid the "issue of the day" or crisis decision-making or public reaction from having an undue consideration in the decision hierarchy.  There are even differences between the post-Martins/pre-suspension arguments to hire a woman for the job and the post-suspension arguments and urgency.  The Founding Fathers created the US Senate to slow down what could be a volatile decision-making process in volatile political times, and that's only an example from 300+ years ago.

 

 

[Helene]

57 minutes ago, On Pointe said:

When some random rock act invites groupies to a party and trashes a hotel room,  you hear about it in the media.  Waterbury's complaint references Finlay and others supposedly  being fined $150,000 for something similar,  but I can't find any reference to it.  One would think that given the rarity of a prestige organization's members being involved that there would be a readily accessible news item somewhere.  Does anyone know the particulars?  I still don't  believe a few dancers could inflict that much damage,  no matter how wasted they might have been.

150K was the fine, not the amount of the damages.  There has been no public information so far about how the fine amount was determined.

When some random rock act trashes a hotel room, it generally falls into the "No publicity is bad publicity" pile and is generally, although not exclusively, a reputation enhancer, money well spent, with no attempts to hide it. 

And hardly every smashed up hotel room makes the media.  Financial details, especially when involving insurance, can be close-held, and unless leaked, can be closely held.  

There was a reference earlier in the thread that the incident was discussed on some social media accounts, but not on which accounts or whether they are public-facing.

 

[MintyLee]

3 hours ago, bcash said:

That one succinct comment from Devin Alberda though..

Definitely not vetted by the communications department, lol

[kylara7]

I've just been catching up and...ugh. I'm shocked but not surprised, given how similar issues have arisen in various other areas of work/study (e.g., the Arizona fraternity case, the "Marines United" scandal, which is now repeating itself) and in the public (e.g., the hacking/sharing of Jennifer Lawrence's photos), but sad that it has cast a shadow over New York City Ballet.

The laws in this arena are just starting to catch up with the available technology ('revenge porn' laws and laws explicitly criminalizing the unconsenting sharing of intimate image), which will probably always be the case, but the bad behaviour, lack of respect for others (whether current/former romantic partners, friends, co-workers, or simply fellow human beings) and disregard for consent is infuriating. I hope that whatever investigation goes forward can nail down some answers, but I'm not hopeful that either the legal system or internal investigations can completely address the many questions that we all seem to have

I appreciate the statements by sappho and others who have expressed concern for the woman targeted and the people affected and have pushed back against victim blaming. Having watched several of these sorts of revelations about bad behaviour by beloved figures/institutions play out in the media/social media and in real life, I understand the initial reaction to not wanting to believe that our personal favourites can be problematic, but I'm trying to see it as a grieving process like any other where we collectively move through (and cycle through) the stages of processing.

 

[MintyLee]

2 hours ago, On Pointe said:

When some random rock act invites groupies to a party and trashes a hotel room,  you hear about it in the media.  Waterbury's complaint references Finlay and others supposedly  being fined $150,000 for something similar,  but I can't find any reference to it.  One would think that given the rarity of a prestige organization's members being involved that there would be a readily accessible news item somewhere.  Does anyone know the particulars? 

 

1 hour ago, Helene said:

There was a reference earlier in the thread that the incident was discussed on some social media accounts, but not on which accounts or whether they are public-facing.

It's been a pretty busy year in DC. I think it would be fair of us to cut the Washington bureaus some slack for not picking up on this. Their plates are pretty full, and in the larger scheme of things, this was probably not that important at the time.

[To substantiate my reference to DC using publicly available sources: City Ballet only tours two cities as a whole company in the states: Saratoga and DC. The tour information is regularly up on their website, and I think it's fairly general knowledge for longtime City Ballet watchers. In Saratoga, the dancers rent houses, which can be seen in many, many public IG accounts if you scroll back to the summer. That only leaves DC as the possibility where they would, and do, stay in a hotel. Other tours have been small, partial-company tours like Jackson Hole where those dancers also do not stay in a hotel (with the possible exception of last year's Moves tour, but Chase was not a part of that). Again, this can be seen in many public IG accounts if you scroll back through them. (I hesitate to name specific accounts because I don't see any reason to bring in a dancer who has nothing to do with this just for the sake of example.) The only other cities that NYCB has toured as a whole company have been internationally like Paris, Japan, or Copenhagen (although not this most recent tour to Copenhagen. The most recent tour was a partial company tour and also took place after the time frame of Alex's complaint), and the fine was not stated in Euros or Yen. I guess I am taking a leap here that the amount reported in the complaint was not converted, but I am doing my best to cite sources that remain public. So if you accept my reasoning, the incident in question happened in DC. If you want to get more specific information, there are only two hotels in DC large enough to house all the dancers in the company, plus the orchestra, and anyone who really wants to dig into this further can take it from there.]

2 hours ago, balanchinefreak said:

If it's true that underage girls were involved - that's a big deal.

Not to minimize everything else, but when you cross the territory into underage kids... we are talking about felony.

I just want to clarify that when I was talking about underage girls in the hypothetical situation I mentioned, it was in reference to drinking and partying, not in reference to being included in the illicit images distributed. I know others have mentioned underage girls too, but I want to make it clear on my part. Alex's complaint also does NOT allege any underage girls were victims of that group chat. I know underage girls drinking and partying is not right either, but child porn is far worse, and that is not what anyone has alleged. I don't know if that's even what you were questioning, balanchinefreak--it probably wasn't even, and I am being too cautious. I just want to be extra careful here because these guys are dealing with enough accusations without extra rumors flying around about them.

3 hours ago, Rock said:

When a dancer transitions to the position of a ballet master, it can take some time for their peers to accept them in their new position. Someone who used to dance next to you is now in the front of the room and you're supposed to listen to what they have to say. Difficult. Same with the NYCB's interim team. Those people were all very recently dancers in the company. While Bouder's comments are tiresome, they're also typical. 

What you say is very true, Rock, and I agree with you. At the same time, I think if you aren't comfortable enforcing the rules, don't step up to the leadership position. Although that's easier said than done, I know.

4 hours ago, balanchinefreak said:

Minty Lee -

I'm a casual fan who used to go to the NYCB a lot before Mr. B died - I just want to thank you for putting in words my feelings. You said everything that was in my heart. In fact, I became somewhat turned off to ballet because of the syndrome you so skillfully and honestly portrayed.  Ballet is full of bad boys who are tacitly patted on the back - and since we're being so honest, it's because they are male, and straight. Ballet has a reputation for being girlie and gay, so when straight boys act up, it's all kind of a joke, isn't it?

That said - 

This picture, while 100% accurate, may not be what the legal system will be able to process.  The legal system is very cut and dried and only punishes what is illegal, not what is immoral. 

That said -

If these men were engaging in this activity on company time, then I do think NYCB is responsible. But I'm not a lawyer. Let the law weigh in on that. 

Thank you so much for your kind words--I agree with your assessment as well. The Venn diagram between morally wrong and legally wrong and where these accusations about the "frat-boy" environment at City Ballet might fall is not something any of us here can probably determine right now with what we know.

Part of the reason I wrote the hypothetical description you mentioned is I think it's important for all of us who love and follow City Ballet so closely--closely enough to post over 30 pages of messages about this--to consider how the institution has failed these male dancers just as much as it has failed the female dancers. (I won't expound my thoughts on that again, but they are in my first post is at the bottom of page 25 of this thread.)  As fervently as I support Alex, I am not here to villainize Chase, Zach, Amar, or anyone else involved in this. None of these men were born with the desire in their heart to hurt Alex or their co-workers. They may have done bad things, but I do not think they are inherently bad people.

If we can examine the systemic failures at SAB and NYCB, and in the greater ballet world, I think it's easier to see them as people who had bad influences at critical inflections points in their lives, who learned many wrong ways to deal with their problems, and made bad, bad mistakes. Perhaps that is why I have been trying so adamantly to consider City Ballet's role in creating this "frat-boy" culture--because it makes it easier for me to try to understand what someone asked earlier--"What happened to Chase?"

At any rate, their mistakes have already been made, and they will have to face the consequences of their decisions if the allegations prove true. What redemption might look like for them afterward is probably too soon to discuss now. But my hope is that Alex's case can expose the failures at SAB and NYCB to help make sure the promise of the next generation of young male dancers doesn't turn into the disappointments of this generation.

8 hours ago, lmspear said:

Even if personal devices were used by the men in Waterbury's case, there is the possibility that company email addresses, WI-FI, and servers were used.  The company then becomes, probably unknowingly, the provider of the distribution method of harmful messages and photos.  I believe it has been established in cases involving businesses and government that there is no expectation of privacy if your material is routed through your employer's computer servers. 

This is a very interesting thought, Imspear. I wonder if the same is true for just using a company's Wi-Fi router instead of using the server. I know from personal experience that the reception is horrible backstage at the Koch. If text messages were sent during work hours from those premises, the likelihood could be that the cell phones would have needed to connect to the company Wi-Fi to get a signal. But I don't know if that in and of itself is enough. The situation is also different at the Rose because it is shared with some many other organizations--it may be harder to say whose Wi-Fi may or may not have been used and whose it was.

I cannot cite any sources that show City Ballet dancers do not have company emails like the administration or the staff does, except to say if someone were to try emailing cfinlay@nycballet.com or zcatazaro@nycballet.com, it would say the address does not exist.  

7 hours ago, rkoretzky said:

NYCB is not, in fact, leaderless. There is an executive director. Other than her signature on the recent email, along with Jon Stafford, where is Kathy brown? 

 

6 hours ago, rkoretzky said:

Who should be the official spokesperson for the company? Scharf? Jon Stafford? 

I suggest that is the responsibility of the executive director. 

 

7 hours ago, rkoretzky said:

Again, why isn’t the executive director stepping up? 

I also find this odd and perhaps a bit of a PR blunder. Okay, perhaps blunder is too strong. At least a missed opportunity. If the company's female executive director had issued the first two statements expressing the company's concern for the safety and well-being of its female dancers instead of a male board chair who only talked in terms of liability, perhaps the public backlash might have been a degree less virulent. It is interesting that she is there for the day-to-day while Mr. Scharf is not.

 

[BalanchineFan]

5 hours ago, cinnamonswirl said:

NIED is negligent infliction of emotional distress and IIED is intentional infliction of emotional distress. Waterbury's NIED and IIED claims have a twist because they are indirect -- it wasn't NYCB that took the actions that caused her distress. Usually these claims are direct (like her claims against Finlay).

A couple of people have asked me very specific questions that I don't feel comfortable answering off the top of my head. My posts have been based on my initial reaction to the complaint (issue spotting it, if you will). I haven't looked at case law or even the relevant statutes so I think I need to stop answering such specific questions. 

I don't think merely doing something on company time would give rise to liability if they were on personal devices using personal phone numbers.  Even if they were on company Wifi, I'm not sure the company has the duty to actively monitor Wifi use for improper activity (if that's even possible). Using company Wifi won't go through the company's server. Certainly if they used company email or devices that would be very different and I would have expected the complaint to state that.

Thank you for the NIED and IIED definitions!

When I see the phrase “expectation of privacy” all that comes to mind is the expectation of privacy you have in an apartment having sex with your bf. Once Ms Waterbury discovered the texts, the senders had no protection on that basis due to the harm they were doing to her. A thief who breaks into your car can’t claim “expectation of privacy” when you catch him. 

Edited September 9, 2018 by BalanchineFan

[Amy Reusch]

I would like to thank the volunteer administrators of this board, and Helene in particular, for the time she has recently donated keeping up with this thread.  I am so grateful to you for making this and all the other discussions possible, despite the amount of oversight a thread like this requires.  I hope this is not considered discussing the discussers.  Thank you.  

[volcanohunter]

8 hours ago, Amy Reusch said:

I would like to thank the volunteer administrators of this board, and Helene in particular, for the time she has recently donated keeping up with this thread.  I am so grateful to you for making this and all the other discussions possible, despite the amount of oversight a thread like this requires.  I hope this is not considered discussing the discussers.  Thank you.  

 from me also.

Edited September 10, 2018 by volcanohunter

[Helene]

Thank you for the kind words, Amy.  Yesterday was a little dicey, because I had a full day commitment, and was trying to moderate intermittently on my phone, which is hard when you have to two-finger it and have little hand-eye coordination, lol.  It always astonishes me to see the kids these days flying through texts with two thumbs, and in Seattle, toggling between character sets.  I tried to thumb it one day and sent my phone flying down the aisle of a bus .

[Emma]

34 minutes ago, Amy Reusch said:

I would like to thank the volunteer administrators of this board, and Helene in particular, for the time she has recently donated keeping up with this thread.  I am so grateful to you for making this and all the other discussions possible, despite the amount of oversight a thread like this requires.  I hope this is not considered discussing the discussers.  Thank you.  

+1. Thank you Helene!

[nanushka]

35 minutes ago, Amy Reusch said:

I would like to thank the volunteer administrators of this board, and Helene in particular, for the time she has recently donated keeping up with this thread.  I am so grateful to you for making this and all the other discussions possible, despite the amount of oversight a thread like this requires.  I hope this is not considered discussing the discussers.  Thank you.  

YES. I really appreciate having this space.

[Balletwannabe]

Honestly I wonder if she read the posts here questioning her mental health and this is her response.

Edited September 9, 2018 by Balletwannabe