Sunday, June 27, 2010
Did GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman shove an employee when
she was CEO of eBay -- resulting in a $200,000 settlement for the employee?
Well, she did tell the Los Angeles Times on Thursday that she
"physically guided" eBay employee Young Mi Kim "out of the conference room
into a hallway."
Shortly after Whitman won the GOP primary, The New York Times cited
"multiple" unnamed sources to support a report that on June 1, 2007, Whitman
and Kim had some sort of spat. According to the story, while there were no
witnesses to the event, Kim told "at least one colleague" that Whitman "used
an expletive and shoved her." Kim left eBay for four months, but returned
after there was a settlement.
I've tried to get an explanation. Though given ample opportunity,
Team Meg won't deny a physical element to the incident or do the other
requisite things a campaign does to kill a bad story.
Last week, when KTKZ radio talk-show host Eric Hogue asked Whitman
to clarify what happened, she said, "We had a misunderstanding. It was a
verbal dispute and that kind of thing can happen in a high-pressure work
environment, and we put it behind us a long time ago."
"I've heard a lot of expletives, and I haven't heard one yet that
would warrant $200,000," quipped Sterling Clifford, spokesman for Attorney
General Jerry Brown's Democratic gubernatorial campaign. Good point.
As a voter, I want to know if there is a pattern here.
Thursday, Whitman told the Associated Press that the altercation was
an "anomaly" that taught her to be thoughtful about interactions with
co-workers. Actually, The New York Times reported that eBay execs considered
the episode an "anomaly," also. Kim told the paper, "We had an unfortunate
incident, but we resolved it in a way that speaks well for her." So maybe it
was a freak six-figure outburst that taught Whitman a lesson.
Would a wrong answer disqualify Whitman? Not necessarily.
And it's not as if she is tarnished, and all other California
politicians have clean slates when it comes to treatment of staff.
As Oakland mayor, Brown made his long-time guru Jacques Barzaghi a
senior adviser to the city in 1999. Brown demoted Barzaghi and cut his
$118,000 pay after a 2001 sexual-harassment charge, but he kept his pal on
the city payroll even after the city paid a $50,000 settlement. In a 2003
interview, Brown told the East Bay Express he didn't think complaints by
other women about Barzaghi were true.
It wasn't until 2004, when police went to Barzaghi's home on a
domestic disturbance call, that Barzaghi left Oakland's payroll.
After I mentioned Barzaghi, Clifford responded that Brown
"eventually dismissed him." And: "This incident at eBay goes beyond an
employee who had a problem"; it goes to "the temperament and behavior of a
person who wants to be governor."
I asked if Brown's actions had resulted in any legal settlements.
"There have been none," Clifford answered.
That said, it was choice to read California Democratic Party
Executive Director Shawnda Westly faulting Whitman's "explosive
temperament." After all, state party chairman John "F-Bomb" Burton was the
target of a sexual harassment lawsuit when he was Senate president pro tem.
That matter settled out of court, too.
As a Republican, I want to know why Whitman did not disclose this
story during the primary.
Did she tell campaign staff? I can't get an on-the-record answer,
although The New York Times reported that Whitman's senior campaign adviser
and eBay alum Henry Gomez was in the loop.
Maybe, as a political neophyte, Whitman does not understand that the
people who support her have a right to know if she recently agreed to a
legal settlement that could hurt GOP chances in November. In any event, she
left GOP primary voters out of the loop.
"We knew about it a long time ago," Clifford told me. "It's a
well-known incident in the business community in Silicon Valley." (He also
denied that the Brown campaign had anything to do with The New York Times
Face it: This story was bound to get out.
And it did.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
See Other Political Commentary
See Other Commentary by Debra J. Saunders
Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports.
Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.
We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter, the Rasmussen Report on radio and other media outlets.
Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $3.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on Election 2012, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.