camel lips

George Hopkins Charged with two Counts Sexual Assault

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

I remember hearing somewhere that they did. Could be wrong.

They did.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

I think one of the most eye-popping claims in his lawsuit against YEA is that he is demanding pay for unused vacation time. This from a man who consistently REFUSED to take vacations and discussed frequently on his social media how he hated vacations, didn't want to take them, avoided doing it for years, and only reluctantly took some time away near the end. 

And now he wants to be paid for the time that he adamantly, and publicly,  insisted he wasn't going to use. What a piece of work.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NakedEye said:

I think one of the most eye-popping claims in his lawsuit against YEA is that he is demanding pay for unused vacation time. This from a man who consistently REFUSED to take vacations and discussed frequently on his social media how he hated vacations, didn't want to take them, avoided doing it for years, and only reluctantly took some time away near the end. 

And now he wants to be paid for the time that he adamantly, and publicly,  insisted he wasn't going to use. What a piece of work.

We can really just laugh at the absurdity.  I’m interested in the “contractual” severance-per-month agreement.  The specificity of those words is very important.  Nov 15th to respond...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NakedEye said:

I think one of the most eye-popping claims in his lawsuit against YEA is that he is demanding pay for unused vacation time. This from a man who consistently REFUSED to take vacations and discussed frequently on his social media how he hated vacations, didn't want to take them, avoided doing it for years, and only reluctantly took some time away near the end. 

And now he wants to be paid for the time that he adamantly, and publicly,  insisted he wasn't going to use. What a piece of work.

Nailed it. 👏👏👏👏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how long of a time did he have to work to be owed 600k in back pay? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

So how long of a time did he have to work to be owed 600k in back pay? 

From the 11/4 article:  

"YEA has until Thursday to respond to Hopkins’ lawsuit, which alleges that the organization owes him one month’s pay for each of his 35 years at YEA, as spelled out in his contract. At the time he left YEA, the lawsuit says, Hopkins was being paid $199,000 a year, meaning severance alone would amount to more than $580,000. He also claims he is owed $33,074 for unpaid business expenses, bonus pay for 2017, unused vacation time, and the YEA contribution to his 401(k) account."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

199k a year...  talked about ###### up priorities...... Hope everyone who donates to a corps knows how much staff is being paid. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

199k a year...  talked about ###### up priorities...... Hope everyone who donates to a corps knows how much staff is being paid. 

In my case, I find the 35 years more troubling that the $199k.  That’s just too long, IMO.  Given that kind of absolute power for that long.... He probably believed he was omnipotent. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

So how long of a time did he have to work to be owed 600k in back pay? 

Exactly.  It's important math.  And, specifically, present value or future value?

But, in any case, it's invalid because he was fired.  He can argue whether or not he was fired, but the rest is contract verbiage and simple math.

Sounds like discovery would tell an awful lot.  I would think only a signature accepting possession of one's resignation would demonstrate a "delivered" resignation.  If the Board had that before they fired him, well...  And I think the lawyers would argue the details of when an employee is properly "notified" of his firing.  The agreement's words would be awfully important in context.

Eh, ...

I'm no lawyer but, if Hop's contentions have merit, I'd remind the prior board members of what "fiduciary" means; one thing is that they are personally responsible.  If they, as a board, allowed this agreement to live for, according to the verbiage in the article, decades and never challenged, reviewed, or amended it, then they failed in their responsibility to protect financially the org on the departure of the Director.  I'd sue them personally for every nickel the corps has to pay Hop his settlement.  They made/allowed the rules, they themselves, personally should pay the damages.  That's what fiduciary means.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

I am not sure where the rock bottom is yet - this might just be a ledge

A great deal has to do with how typical George Hopkins' situations is in the activity. I would say in many ways he is atypical. Yes every director wants what is best for his/her corps as GH did. He did push the envelope during his time with DCI, but again that is not that different from other directors. He called all the shots, but again that is not that different from other directors. However, what makes a difference is that we may be dealing with someone who could be diagnosed with a narcissistic personality, which should be stated at the outset is not an excuse for criminal behavior, and this adds a different dimension. His rants were like no others. When people disagreed with him, he reacted in a way that differentiated him from other directors. He also believed rules did not apply to him yet he made sure every rule applied to everyone else. The fact that some of the behavior GH is being charged with takes place in a wok environment and some may involve spiking a drink may make this situation unique. 

I don't think we're going to hear of this kind of behavior from most corps that have an issue with sexual misconduct. This is not to minimize the seriousness of sexual abuse and misconduct. We will hear about boundary violations, perhaps some coercion, and issues we know are wrong but criminally may fall into gray area with the exception of cases involving minors, which are always criminal . We may hear of more wrong hirings. We will hear of cases which will demonstrate why we need written policies stating zero tolerance, and if appropriate involvement with law enforcement may be necessary, but GH's situation may be different.

The GH situation may be at rock bottom, but of what other posters have said in this thread and others, we may not even be at the ledge yet since all we have are stories, rumors, and hearsay. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.