Already in a world of fiscal hurt due to the “death of print,” multi-magazine publisher Condé Nast (which pioneered of all those specialty “lifestyle” magazines) stands to lose millions in a wrongful termination lawsuit … assuming one winds up being filed.
The company – which publishes GQ, Vogue, Golf Digest and Vanity Fair, among other titles, recently fired an employee at Brides magazine for showing off her new boob job.
Except no, that’s not really what happened … the employee didn’t technically “show” her boobs, she was wearing a sports bra at the time she revealed them. Also, the “incident” took place inside her office (with the door closed) with two colleagues who also happened to be longtime friends.
Oh, and the colleagues were both women – and had specifically asked the woman to show them her new rack.
Here’s the scoop, courtesy of Keith J. Kelly at the New York Post:
Shortly before year-end, an employee at Brides was axed — apparently because of an incident related to her breast-augmentation surgery. News of the ouster has been buzzing around the Condé Nast tower since employees returned from the holiday break.
According to the woman, who was tracked down by Media Ink but was reluctant to speak on the record because it might affect her ability to get a job, she spoke about her procedure to two female colleagues who asked to see the results.
The woman, who was having the conversation in her office, closed the door, and unbuttoned her blouse to reveal a sports bra.
“It was within the confines of my office, behind closed doors,” the ex-employeee said. “There was no nudity involved. They were personal friends who I had known for years.”
Nevertheless, word about what happened ricocheted around the office and one staffer quickly went to human resources, which informed the woman that same day that a complaint had been lodged.
“[Human resources] told me they were going to investigate and that they would get back to me,” she said. Two days later, she said, HR brought her in and terminated her.
Does it sound to anybody else like Condé Nast was just looking for a reason to fire this chick?
Frankly, that’s pathetic. Here at FITS, we encourage recipients of breast augmentation to express themselves more freely. It’s in our corporate code of conduct, in fact, right next to the section that permits the sexual harassment of men.
By No Way! January 12, 2010 at 9:31 pm
Those are gigantic!
By Lundasoid January 12, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Inflate to 40 PSI
By CityTrader January 13, 2010 at 10:15 am
I wonder who the idiot was who filed the complaint?
By jim January 13, 2010 at 1:08 pm
It was likely an envious woman with smaller boobs.
By John January 13, 2010 at 1:56 pm
Someone who didn’t see them.
By rk January 13, 2010 at 1:58 pm
whos the girl in the pic
By Disgusted January 13, 2010 at 2:26 pm
@CityTrader
Either a sexually repressed male or an overweight jealous woman.
By @LadyLUX January 13, 2010 at 2:40 pm
I feel sorry for the print industry! What will they do?
By JohnnyD January 13, 2010 at 3:18 pm
“I wonder who the idiot was who filed the complaint?”
I’ll bet it was the one lesbian who did not get invited to the closed door meeting.
By Robert Bryant January 13, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Let me guess…the complaint was filed by a woman with a size “B” cup, who wears thick glasses, who hasn’t had a date in years, if ever, and is disliked by everyone because she is a bee-itch.
By ntopics January 13, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Employees should never discuss
personal activities at the office
because one can be easily fired.
thanks from tony
By Hanninen January 13, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Someone who was jealous of the breast-augmentation and should have just shut their mouth and been happy for her.
By b00bfan January 13, 2010 at 3:58 pm
The lonely ugly girl in the basement of course, no man would have filed a complaint. The other woman was threatened by this woman and found a seemingly legit way to eliminate the threat. The ex-employee should be able to retire nicely when she wins the case or gets her settlement.
By Peter January 13, 2010 at 4:02 pm
The thing about corporate sexual harassment is that it only takes one person to be offended and it’s harassment. The offended person doesn’t even need to be in the immediate vicinity of the “event”, as it was in this case. All they need to do is be offended and complain to HR.
Unfortunately that’s how it works. To say that Conde Nast was looking for an excuse to fire this girl is baseless at best, libel at worst. I personally think the policy is unrealistic, lacks common sense and errs too much on the side of caution. Things like this should be evaluated in context and not hearsay.
By Rambo's dad January 13, 2010 at 4:08 pm
@CityTrader- Some ugly girl, or a backstabbing opportunist.
By BoobsMcDoogalstein January 13, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Boobs are as American as…Apple boobs, I mean pie.
By Name (required) January 13, 2010 at 5:09 pm
Probably some A cup chick, who wasn’t getting any action lol
By SnakeMD January 13, 2010 at 5:18 pm
I worked for the CEO of a small firm who worked well into his eighties. This little dapper dirty-old-man always told us that he only had two requirements when looking to hire the company secretary / receptionist. “She must have nice tits and a nice ass–we can teach anybody to type!”
By Sam January 13, 2010 at 6:39 pm
ha sounds like an episode of “The Office”
By Yes Way! January 13, 2010 at 8:13 pm
I’m sure somebody not as well endowed.
By Snarky Commenter January 13, 2010 at 9:58 pm
The idiot was some other lesbian chick with low self image and a bank account too small to get new bewbies of her own.
By No duh January 13, 2010 at 10:11 pm
@CityTrader: Probably some bitch that couldn’t afford her own pair.
By Zac January 13, 2010 at 10:33 pm
Sounds like it was used as an excuse to fire her.
By Live Sports Paradise January 13, 2010 at 11:30 pm
“She may have been fired, but I got a raise.”
Comment on digg :S
By Joshua January 13, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Lets be honest. It is not professional to take any garment of clothing off.
By ProfessorDoom January 14, 2010 at 12:03 am
@CityTrader
Probably some flat chested feminist who can’t get a man to so much as look in her direction.
By Kurt Evans January 14, 2010 at 12:57 am
That’s a lame reason to fire someone. I think she should sue.
By Jhangora January 14, 2010 at 1:56 am
I like ur website a lot. Normal news is boring.
By nem January 14, 2010 at 2:10 am
@citytrader most likely someone who had a smaller boob job
By titties January 14, 2010 at 2:35 am
oh… sarcasm I get it
By Alex January 14, 2010 at 3:26 am
Who the fuck cares? Someone got fired for showing fake tits? Fuck off
By R3SiEViL January 14, 2010 at 6:09 am
@ CityTrader
I wouldent doubt that it was a jealous female co-worker? Damn nice rack..
By Gerry January 14, 2010 at 6:35 am
oh… sarcasm I get it..
By Kimberly January 14, 2010 at 8:32 am
Well, the of the three, someone told someone else who then told someone who could make a big deal of it. Out of the 3 women in the incident, at least one of them spilled the beans outside that office.
By Dustin January 14, 2010 at 10:58 am
Honestly, she should NOT have done this at the office. It’s unprofessional. Thinking on how many times there are lawsuits against a company for allowing sexual harassment and related activities to happen, companies are rightly scared and should take a harsh position on this.
I think it’s a tad silly to expect companies to stop certain types of activities but then to turn around and sue them when you violate what is probably an HR policy about this type of stuff.
By Warren January 14, 2010 at 8:59 pm
I’m pretty sure that’s not her picture at the top of the page. I’m actually amazed people think it is.
Oh, and I don’t think the company was wrong to fire her. Okay, firing her is a little extreme, but it’s really silly for people who don’t work with her and don’t know her to leap to her defense just because she has big boobs.
By Jim Norcal January 15, 2010 at 1:09 pm
This has railroad job written all over it. There’s no way she would have been terminated over this under normal circumstances. This is obviously one of those ‘look for any reason we can’ kind of things and HR found it with that complaint. I really do hope the woman takes the company for everything she can.
I’ve been around these games enough now to see the text between the lines. Their excuse for termination was artificial.
By vzw January 17, 2010 at 7:35 pm
Her friends tested the motorboatability and found them seaworthy.
By bed boy January 18, 2010 at 12:55 am
Hmmm…that is strange, she got fired, but I got a raise…
By buzz January 19, 2010 at 1:00 am
firing people like this gives purpose and creates employment opportunities for those corporate hr and legal type to create more policies.
By mrwords January 20, 2010 at 6:10 pm
TIP They always have to show off their new boobs to anyone who asks…
By breadline January 23, 2010 at 8:10 pm
don’t get me wrong, I think boobs are about the greatest thing in the world. but playing with implants, even though the skin around them is real, is just like playing with a blow up doll. I mean no disrespect to those women who have had implants due to breast cancer or something like that. but the ones who do it for ego,? just be yourself ladies, big or small , natural is always the best. stop listening to boobheaded men !
By BritCat January 24, 2010 at 2:19 pm
I would hate to go up against her if she takes it to trial. No man would vote against her.
By Doh March 8, 2010 at 2:11 am
I love how everyone of you is believing her story. There is no comment from her employer at all and no written proof of why she was fired.
You dont know what really happened here and you should hear both sides before making a decision.
Or you can carry on being mindles drones told what to think by entertainment media.
By popoyking May 21, 2010 at 2:10 am
all the dumbfucks who got serious in the comment section are… well… dumbfucks.
whoa, nice rack, gonna eat that.