You should watch him in the limited distribution intro to Inside Out...
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Lasseter taking leave of absence
- Thread starter Lou Filerman
- Start date
AEfx
Well-Known Member
How many people do you think are involved? Realistically? That are so traumatized about this that they couldn't handle working at the same company, even if they never have to see him or deal with him again?
Again, this is the problem with anonymous sources telling stuff third-hand. We don't know, but Disney does - and if it was significant, I don't think they would be considering this.
I'm pretty sure you yourself said earlier in this thread when this all went down, that a lot would depend on what was reported as time went on - well, it's been over six months now. And no mass allegations have come out. Nothing has come out, at all, aside from some petty rumors of gripes about "taking credit for work" that could be lobbied at any executive (does anyone think Steve Jobs invented the iPhone?).
You have a few people who say "OH it bothered everyone!" but that isn't enough to stand on in terms of evidence. This was "allegations of allegations" of slight discomfort. And don't tell me that if there wasn't more, especially with Disney involved and being the clickbait that just that name is, that it wouldn't have been bigger news. All these other reports of heinous Hollywood behavior all started with one article like this, then spiraled - and this one didn't move an inch.
So really, I stand by what I said - if said employees are one of the ones who felt uncomfortable before, it's been six months, they will no longer under his charge, they obviously won't put be in situations with him again. They now have had ample chance to have their say to the company (and in the media, had they so chosen, anonymously or not) - then at this point - that is in the territory of revenge, not justice.
If there really are these few (and we have *no* evidence that there are any at all who are claiming to be so traumatized) who absolutely cannot handle him working somewhere in the company, then I'm sorry, at some point when you are talking a situation like this, "I was uncomfortable", there needs to be a line drawn somewhere at a reasonable expectation of at least a tiny bit of maturity in moving on at some point.
smile
Well-Known Member
patience for drunk johnny had already began to wane before all this hullabaloo
i maintain a why bother? stance...
a perfect time for cutting ties to someone with power whose best years are most likely behind him.
if no one can currently fill a similar role at pixar, there are larger problems at play
i maintain a why bother? stance...
a perfect time for cutting ties to someone with power whose best years are most likely behind him.
if no one can currently fill a similar role at pixar, there are larger problems at play
AEfx
Well-Known Member
So, you have total faith in their ability to manage their PR, but because to the public appearance that a bunch of theme park enthusiast can "piece together" on a Disney message board, things must be sinister?
You really truly believe that Disney HR hasn't met with every single employee who worked with him? You really don't have a realistic idea of what is going on right now in the entertainment industry. Companies, especially like Disney, more so than anyone likely, are so freaking terrified of this stuff and how quickly it can all come crashing down that the entire industry is walking on the lightest of eggshells right now. One anonymous report on social media or a single online article can cost 100's of millions of dollars in immediate damages to a company.
I think the difference in how we see this is that while I would have agreed with you even a year ago about Disney's prowess in keeping things quiet - we live in a world now where that isn't how it works anymore. The rules of the game have completely flipped, and anyone caught with even the whiff of covering something up gets lumped in with the perpetraor and tossed out.
You think Iger is going to let that happen on his watch? He would go down to, if it turned out that they were suppressing any allegations whatsoever.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure quite where we disagree here, because of course I think Disney HR has been scrambling as much as possible to talk to everyone who worked with him, hold "listening sessions", and pursue every other avenue available to them to stop this snowballing. So why, then, bring him back and risk undoing their efforts to keep this scandal relatively contained?
I'm not saying he's necessarily sinister and I'm glad they haven't tried to erase all traces of him ever existing as has happened with so many people caught up in the MeToo scandals. There seems enough around these allegations, though, to make him more of a liability than an asset to the company right now. He was obviously out of control by the time he was fired, too. He did stumble out to his most recent big D23 presentation noticeably drunk.
smile
Well-Known Member
be wary of such thinking as far worse is hushed on the daily... everywhere
- we undoubtedly still live in a world with glass houses, iron curtains, sacrificial lambs, and some utterly dreadful people with money and/or power.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
I guess that is where we disagree - you think that this somehow spirals far deeper and is being "contained", and I don't see any reason to believe that it really was any more than what was already reported.
In fact, as we sit and debate if they should take him back or not, the last official stance of the company was in fact that this was a six-month sabbatical for him to get his act together. So until we hear otherwise, we should be *expecting* him to return.
I know it is crazy to think, but maybe everyone did what they were supposed to do?
Maybe he went away, got sober, and learned his lesson after being publicly humiliated, is a better person for it, and you know, maybe even his creativity will skyrocket.
Maybe the people that were uncomfortable have had six months of company support to work through this, and it has been dealt with to their satisfaction.
Maybe the company did the right thing and has come to agreements with all parties that they are comfortable with as resolution.
You know, nuttier things have happened - and given that every bad date a celebrity/executive has had in their past has been written about, no more came out about this because maybe there wasn't any more to come out!
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Actually, we don't really disagree on that. I have no reason to think there's more than what has been reported. However, I do think what has been reported is enough for Disney to part ways with him.
If what has been reported is inaccurate, then I am not hostile to him coming back and that case being made. I just haven't seen anyone yet say that his alleged behaviour would be out of character, not the person they worked with, etc. In other words, things may change, but with everything as it stands right now I think they'd be crazy from a PR perspective to bring him back and risk reports from publications like Hollywood Reporter and Variety getting a wider airing.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
And I don't. If you really go back and read what was reported, it was "he hugged too long" and "he put his hand on my knee and I was afraid he was *going to* put it higher". Have you never seen a "people person" touch someone else's knee? And again, this guy was a "celebrity" at a schmoozy, creative company, and to a portion of fandom that he interacted with quite a bit. Do you not think it uncommon for creative people who don't fancy themselves "businessmen" like him to make casual body contact like that? Have you ever seen a talk show?
I am not saying it was not wrong if he did it too long and and/or it made someone feel uncomfortable, or that it shouldn't have stopped if they were. Clearly, this is not something that can be done any longer and he has been put on notice. But to act like he worked, well, nearly any where else in America than Disney's happy good time loving family even-a-stiff-like-Bob-Iger hugs Mickey movie studio, doesn't really work. No one is even reporting actual sexual advances. He hugged too long and let his hand linger too long. Wrong. He won't do it any more. If he does - out on his can.
And I think if there were more to air, it would air - and as everyone has stated, Disney was just fine financially (Coco, etc.) even though they didn't chose to "insta fire" him and instead sent him away for six months - and now it has been what, a week or more since the rumors, and it never got picked up? It just isn't a big enough story with Weinstein being charged, Bill Cosby is going to jail...and since this story originally broke, this is easily on the low-end of the scale. I could be wrong - it could blow up - but at this point, remember, he was simply on sabbatical.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Again, I think we have different interpretations of what is being described in these articles. You're describing a big puppy dog with pure intentions living in a 1960s talk show world who might playfully tap me as a man on the knee in the same way he would a woman if I were sitting next to him. What is being suggested is that specifically women who worked at Pixar had to adopt strategies to avoid unwanted physical contact with him. That included sitting away from him in board meetings, adopting a defensive posture to stop him running his hand up their leg, turning their heads in the corredor so they didn't have to endure lingering kisses , hugs, and whispering, or even being excluded from meetings on the pretext Lasseter had a hard time controlling himself around attractive young women. In other words, he created a hostile work environment for women.
Neither of us were there, so we don't really know what it was like working under Lasseter. However, we do know there was enough of a problem to send him on sabbatical in the first place and to bring HR people in to try and fix the work culture once they sent him away. People lose their jobs for less than that.
I honestly don't quite understand why you seem so insistent that Disney should risk a public backlash in bringing him back. Is it because you feel he's a big loss creatively to the company? Or is it a matter of principle? We're already seeing some negative stories and #LoseLasseter appear after the idea he might come back was floated in WSJ. If you were Iger, why would you decide to risk that blowing out further?
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
He also allegedly asked a male employee to take him to a strip club...so the effect of his alleged inappropriate behavior wasn't limited to women.
He reportedly made out with a staffer at a 2010 Oscar's party, the incident which allegedly brought Iger's attention to his inappropriate behavior. So, the notion that JL 'had to be told' last year that his behavior was inappropriate or that JL was unaware is bogus.
ETA: Even consensual behavior can be considered sexual harassment, and the typical standards for defense of such behavior does not apply to high-ranking company officials. JL has been a liability since at least 2010, provided that reports are accurate.
Last edited:
We have not heard anything more about sexual advances on Lasseter's part. If there were more than unwanted and awkward contact (and a public sloppy, tongue action kiss) on the part of a (potentially) autistic man who has a problem with the bottle, it would've come out. It's a shame that most of the media on the "Lasseter Watch" is still reporting it all as "evidence that he is a sexual predator" and many in the #LoseLasseter campaign have conflated what he did with that. They are not focusing on what the real, potentially damning things about him are and why people may not want him to go back: his allegedly having turned Pixar into his personal fiefdom, taking credit for things he didn't have so much to do with, and being considered a belligerant, bullying tyrant.
If that picture is true, then that suggests that Lasseter was basically Steve Jobs' lapdog, and so in awe of him and how he ran things at Apple that he decided to take that management style to Pixar and Disney Animation. It suggests that Jobs, while being someone who could keep Lasseter in line, was also simultaneously a bad influence who, along with the flush of success and accolades, corrupted him and utterly transformed him into something unpleasant. And even then, we can't be completely sure that it is true, given that those who worked most closely with him haven't commented publicly, the man who claims to have created Cars and that Lasseter appropriated credit from is basically the animation equivalent of Lars von Trier (and all that it implies), and the only one who has said anything, Chris Montan, states that "that isn't the John that I know."
Regardless, if Lasseter has been working on himself all this time, has been humbled, and is healthier, there is no reason not to bring him back without having his prior power, and giving the reins in terms of leadership to Pete Docter, Brad Bird, Rich Moore and Jennifer Lee. Of course, if he hasn't, and is still in denial about himself, or won't return without simply taking back his old job when it isn't prudent, then Iger has to cut the strings. I feel that is very fair and deserving.
If that picture is true, then that suggests that Lasseter was basically Steve Jobs' lapdog, and so in awe of him and how he ran things at Apple that he decided to take that management style to Pixar and Disney Animation. It suggests that Jobs, while being someone who could keep Lasseter in line, was also simultaneously a bad influence who, along with the flush of success and accolades, corrupted him and utterly transformed him into something unpleasant. And even then, we can't be completely sure that it is true, given that those who worked most closely with him haven't commented publicly, the man who claims to have created Cars and that Lasseter appropriated credit from is basically the animation equivalent of Lars von Trier (and all that it implies), and the only one who has said anything, Chris Montan, states that "that isn't the John that I know."
Regardless, if Lasseter has been working on himself all this time, has been humbled, and is healthier, there is no reason not to bring him back without having his prior power, and giving the reins in terms of leadership to Pete Docter, Brad Bird, Rich Moore and Jennifer Lee. Of course, if he hasn't, and is still in denial about himself, or won't return without simply taking back his old job when it isn't prudent, then Iger has to cut the strings. I feel that is very fair and deserving.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
I don't know the history of their relationship? If it started in the workplace, HR policy/procedure often requires that non-platonic relationships be reported, which guards against sexual harassment claims. What I was referring to - consensual relationships can be considered harassment where it's a quid pro quo, eg sexual favors for career advancement.
As to the high-ranking company officials part, per EEOC enforcement guidance: [my emphasis added]
A. Standard of Liability
An employer is liable for unlawful harassment whenever the harasser is of a sufficiently high rank to fall “within that class . . . who may be treated as the organization’s proxy.” Faragher, 118 S. Ct. at 2284.94 In such circumstances, the official’s unlawful harassment is imputed automatically to the employer.95 Thus the employer cannot raise the affirmative defense, even if the harassment did not result in a tangible employment action.
B. Officials Who Qualify as “Alter Egos” or “Proxies”
The Court, in Faragher, cited the following examples of officials whose harassment could be imputed automatically to the employer:
Faragher, 118 S. Ct. at 2284.
Faragher = 1998 Supreme Court Case Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 118 S. Ct. 2275 (1998),
Last edited:
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Bob was a senior level executive at ABC when they started dating and was later promoted to President/COO of CapCities. Willow worked at ABC News from 1991-1999. What does the law say about lower level employees dating executives because by today standards, that would not be professionally acceptable?
What I’m trying to say is Bob should not be allowed to make a decision on the subject of Lasseter’s return because he cannot make an independent decision and his views on acceptable behavior may not be in line with best practices.
crxbrett
Well-Known Member
After all of the negative, and rightfully so, press regarding Weinstein, Morgan Freeman, Charlie Rose and countless others - I am positive Disney does not want to take any risks with Lasseter. He's got a history and that's a problem for Disney. If they let him back in and he ends up pulling the same BS again, then Disney will face a ton of backlash for it.
I think he is done at Disney.
I think he is done at Disney.
Phil12
Well-Known Member
Disney has been dealing with various Lasseter problems for many years. There has already been at least one settlement, and there will be others.
https://www.cartoonbrew.com/artist-...-and-pixar-do-about-john-lasseter-158076.html
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Well... it’s certainly not because Disney hired independent investigators to look into the matter and offer a recommendation.
Ball’s in Bob’s court.
This matter not being dealt with either way could lead to women going to press on the record.
SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
The distinction of executives as proxies was made in 1993 Harris v Forklift Systems, where the president had created a hostile work environment. Prior to that, sexual harassment law was according to 1986 SCOTUS Meritor Savings Bank vs. Vinson, where a bank manager had an affair with a subordinate, who later claimed hostile workplace sexual harassment and that the employer was automatically liable because he was her supervisor. SCOTUS rejected the absolute liability standard for supervisors aka there were exceptions.
So, IMO re: Iger, while professional acceptable standards may have been violated, they were not necessarily unlawful.
I am not a lawyer but I did read some of the Court's opinions and American Bar Assn legal defense strategies after these news stories started breaking.