Merrill's "nuts or sluts" defense: Sex bias by any other name.....

We’re betting that Merrill is going to have to pay up big time for this one. And it’s about time. We admit we’re prejudiced, given the major jerking around the Bull has given many talented acquaintances of ours, we've got a right to be.

In a legal scuffle that dates back to 1997 where 900 women filed a sex discrimination against Merrill Lynch, only six of them took it all the way through the arbitration process. One of the litigants, Nancy Thomas, duked it out with Merrill in front of a panel of three judges over 37 days with closing arguments ending last Tuesday. The panel heard her story of how "she was appalled by office episodes that included an obscene photo dropped at her desk; a dildo and lubricating cream left for her in the mailroom; and an office incident in which a male broker allegedly pulled down the underwear of a Merrill woman." Thomas is asking for $22 million plus compensation for emotional distress as well as punitive damages. There's no word on when the panel of judges will rule.

To hear Merrill Lynch & Co. tell it, Nancy Thomas was a lovesick stockbroker whose broken engagement 17 years ago turned her into a branch-office loser from a Wall Street success story.

In a prickly case that may cost Merrill millions (this should only go from our lips to God's ear) -- Thomas is asking for $22 million, plus payment for emotional distress and punitive damages -- arbitrators will have to buy into Merrill's soap-opera tale if the brokerage firm is to walk away with its wallet intact.

Or, alternatively, the arbitrators could be persuaded that the law favors Thomas, who endured a crude, hostile workplace long on retaliation and vulgar humor and short on the perks and support that went to her male colleagues. After 37 hearing days, 15 volumes of exhibits, and 8,000 pages of testimony, lawyers for Merrill and Thomas gave closing arguments Tuesday to a panel of three poker-faced arbitrators.

Thomas, 52, is one of only a half-dozen women in a 1997 class-action lawsuit who took her challenge to Merrill all the way through the arbitration process. Most of the 900 litigants in the sex discrimination lawsuit known as Cremin versus Merrill Lynch settled before any hearing took place. Thomas was one of eight named plaintiffs in the suit.

It isn't clear when the panel will deliver a decision; the panel chairman asked for an extension of the two-week deadline given the complexity of the case. What is clear, though, is that Merrill's legal team made a decision to follow an age-old strategy used in sex discrimination cases: the ``nuts or sluts'' defense, in which a female plaintiff is characterized either as crazy, or a little on the loose side.

Thomas, who favors a buttoned-down look, would be an unlikely contender for the ``sluts'' designation. Even Merrill's lawyer, Andrew J. Schaffran, described Thomas as ``impeccably honest.'' Thomas says she was appalled by office episodes that included an obscene photo dropped at her desk; a dildo and lubricating cream left for her in the mailroom; and an office incident in which a male broker allegedly pulled down the underwear of a Merrill woman.

With the ``slut'' defense off the table, Schaffran's remarks in closing arguments veered toward the ``nuts'' argument.

She was ``hard to get along with,'' and had a ``fixation'' about being assigned lousy clerical help, he told the arbitrators. Besides, ``We know from the record that Ms. Thomas has a personality disorder,'' he said.....

http://wallstfolly.typepad.com/wallstfolly/2006/10/merrill_sex_bia.html