Barring something in her contract, I'm not sure why people think firing her for her appearance changing as she ages would somehow be grounds for a lawsuit.
Age and sex is a protected human right and can be lodged as a complaint to the human rights commission should there be enough evidence that the actions committed were discriminatory in nature. While very difficult to prove, it's pretty apparent that the VP was very vocal about his dislike for her age and appearance.
This situation would be something handled via an official hr commission complaint versus a normal lawsuit (lawsuit would largely deal with severance compensation). Most people don't know this is an option or that it even exists, and most people will not bother with the trouble as they would rather move on and protect their future career (a high profile case may make you seem unemployable or a 'problem')
Last edited by Firebot; 08-18-2022 at 11:01 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
Age and sex is a protected human right and can be lodged as a complaint to the human rights commission should there be enough evidence that the actions committed were discriminatory in nature. While very difficult to prove, it's pretty apparent that the VP was very vocal about his dislike for her age and appearance.
This situation would be something handled via an official hr commission complaint versus a normal lawsuit (lawsuit would largely deal with severance compensation). Most people don't know this is an option or that it even exists, and most people will not bother with the trouble.
Ya -Dealt with this on the corporate side a couple years ago actually, and sort of similar but not quite the same. If our highly paid lawyers were to be believed, the Human rights commission could feasibly cause a great deal of trouble for Bell, and a law suite is definitely in the realm of possibility
The lawyers put the fear of god into us with that happened and we had to tread very carefully.
My cousin is boycotting CTV News for this. She boycotts anyone at the drop of a hat that she disagrees with. She’s far left and is a vegetarian; maybe neither is relevant but she’s very political and likely has a list of companies as long as her arm that she won’t deal with. Many of them are animal-related.
Your experience is probably typical, but you’re missing the point.
Robertson and Mansbridge were allowed to get old and retire on their own accord in their 70s.
Why does Laflamme, the top voted anchor, get the boot at 58?
Some say cost cutting, others say misogyny.
I still think a lot of this has to do with some of the personality conflicts and a difference in direction with a new VP at the helm.
I know a lot of people are talking about cost cutting, a change in viewer habits etc but I don't know how much of that is accurate. It's not like Omar is now going to be doing this gig for $150k a year and Lisa was getting a million. Sure he may be a bit cheaper but is it material to Bell?
I don't know how much of it has to do with age either, I know some say it does but Lisa was 58, looked great, was what I would consider, a silver fox in 2022 and didn't have children so dedicated her life to her work.
Sad to see her go as I almost grew up with her in the news even though I am only 37. Excited for Omar as well but I will say he has his work cut out for him in some ways with the backlash.
Hi Dino, I’m free to type whatever I want on here, if you don’t like it, that’s your problem. Yes, senior citizens love the news and absolutely no one checks the internet to get news now especially with cord cutting, you’re brilliant.
I mean the ratings are right there in my post...lots of people watch the news even if you don't...its some of the highest rated TV in Canada
"nobody watches the news because I don't" is a bad take...especially over and over again when the numbers contradict it
cord cutters also watch the news as it is streamed fyi
1.1 Million viewer average for this one Newscast in Canada does not equal "nobody"
and #1 in 25-52 demographic (the biggest spenders)
__________________
GFG
Last edited by dino7c; 08-18-2022 at 11:20 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
“The general consensus amongst the newsroom is that meeting was a joke,” a producer told the Star. “Lots of empty words and platitudes, absolutely no substance. They called together a room full of professional, career journalists and got absolutely grilled, and had no answers ready. Nobody is happy.”
The whole article because, paywall
Spoiler!
Bell Media executives on Thursday looked to regain control of the internal narrative surrounding the end of star anchor and senior editor Lisa LaFlamme’s contract, acknowledging that there has been “damage” to CTV’s reputation as a result of the high-profile exit.
But a town hall meeting and company memo also served to highlight tensions within the newsroom.
At the afternoon meeting, Michael Melling, the company’s head of news, and Karine Moses, senior vice-president of content development and news, addressed staff.
“I know the team is hurting right now … I am sorry for anyone who has been dragged into this,” said Melling, acknowledging the furious public backlash around LaFlamme’s surprise exit.
The company decided to “move on” from LaFlamme to pursue its “vision” based on factors including audience trends, said Moses, who was behind a table with Melling.
LaFlamme announced her departure Monday through a video posted on Twitter. She said she had been “blindsided” by Bell Media’s decision to end her contract. Public reaction was swift, with critics alleging sexism and ageism as factors in the ending of the 58-year-old’s more than three decades with the company. Further criticism about the culture at CTV News subsequently emerged from staff.
At the Thursday meeting, LaFlamme’s former executive producer, Rosa Hwang, pressed the two executives to clarify whether the decision to end the anchor’s contract had to do with age or gender, asking: “What factors made you think she wouldn’t align with the vision?”
“Was it her age?”
Moses replied: “No. Seriously, I’m a woman. ... I’ve been here 25 years. And do you really think I would fire a woman because she’s a woman?”
“So she was fired then?” Hwang asked.
“That’s not what I’m saying, but you know what I mean,” Moses said, before a moderator cut off Hwang’s line of questioning to move on to the next topic.
Melling said the company would co-ordinate “small team meetings” to provide further context for LaFlamme’s departure, including sharing financial data, and he invited staff to help come up with ways to “map out our future forward together.”
The meeting lasted about half an hour.
“The whole meeting was a disaster,” a staff member later told the Star, speaking on the condition of anonymity, because, they said, they fear reprisal.
“Michael Melling and Karine Moses just abruptly ended the meeting when there were still multiple people who still had questions to ask. … It was extremely disrespectful. It was such a mess; we don’t think it could have gone worse.”
“The general consensus amongst the newsroom is that meeting was a joke,” a producer told the Star. “Lots of empty words and platitudes, absolutely no substance. They called together a room full of professional, career journalists and got absolutely grilled, and had no answers ready. Nobody is happy.”
The meeting followed an internal memo Thursday morning that stated that it had been LaFlamme’s choice not to bid viewers farewell on CTV National News.
The memo to staff from Moses addressed media coverage of LaFlamme’s termination, saying it has been filled with “false narratives.”
“I also want to specifically address accusations that Lisa LaFlamme was not given the opportunity to come back into the studio and have her career at CTV be appropriately celebrated,” read the statement addressed to Bell Media news team members and leaders.
“I have the utmost respect for the contributions that Lisa has made over the last 35 years, and we all wanted to follow the customary practice you have seen in the past of giving proper on air send-off, highlighting her major career achievements.
“As Lisa mentioned in her statement, she was informed of our decision on June 29. After June 29 Lisa was allowed to and did continue to work, covering the papal visit and anchoring the National News during the week of July 25,” wrote Moses, who’s also Bell vice-chair, Québec.
“She opted to not say goodbye to the public during a CTV National newscast. While I wish things had been different, I also respect her decision.”
Several CTV employees told the Star that the memo was upsetting to them and that they were considering leaving the company. The message, one producer felt, was: “Basically ... you all have it wrong; we don’t believe how you feel to be true, mostly because my experience has been positive.”
Another producer said the memo was being seen as an implicit threat to CTV employees who spoke critically about the company’s handling of LaFlamme’s contract: “The memo is just corporate speak for ‘How dare you say things you believe to be true about this newsroom we seemingly have abandoned with no leadership and no communication in an extremely harsh and abrupt manner.’”
In the video she tweeted announcing her departure Monday, LaFlamme said it was “crushing to be leaving CTV National News in a manner that is not my choice.”
“I guess this is my signoff from CTV,” said LaFlamme in the video. “I want to express my deepest gratitude to all of you. To my incredible colleagues for their unwavering support, my dear friends and my loving family.”
LaFlamme had been anchoring the network’s national news program since 2011, part of a 35-year, award-winning career at CTV.
LaFlamme has not responded publicly to the characterization of her departure in Thursday’s memo.
LaFlamme’s replacement, Omar Sachedina, is due to start his role Sept. 5. Until then, Sandie Rinaldo will serve as national anchor, Thursday’s memo said.
Why does Laflamme, the top voted anchor, get the boot at 58?
Some say cost cutting, others say misogyny.
And I’m suggesting people who come to the conclusion that it’s misogyny are missing the context of journalists across the country, men and women, being ruthlessly fired every week. Including several prominent, popular, and long-serving male radio hosts turfed by Bell in recent months. There isn’t a journalist in Canada who should be surprised if they’re laid off tomorrow.
You know when the price of oil drops by $50 a barrel, Calgary-based oil companies carry out mass layoffs, and they target long-serving employees with high salaries? That’s what’s been going on in Canadian newsrooms for years. Anyone with 15+ years experience (the few who are left at this point) is in the crosshairs.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
If she was told in June did she not have a final day? Could she have “signed off”? Or was she told in June but no final day was given and then was told one day it’s done?
Internal workplace review of your newsroom? Can't you just have Michael Melling explain why he fired her?
Should be pretty easy enough to explain and make a statement if it was truly a business case decision and a simple thing like cost cutting no?
They can't divulge because it would open them up to a human rights complaint. Hence the "we are sorry you feel offended and here is a 3rd party review" speel.
And I’m suggesting people who come to the conclusion that it’s misogyny are missing the context of journalists across the country, men and women, being ruthlessly fired every week. Including several prominent, popular, and long-serving male radio hosts turfed by Bell in recent months. There isn’t a journalist in Canada who should be surprised if they’re laid off tomorrow.
You know when the price of oil drops by $50 a barrel, Calgary-based oil companies carry out mass layoffs, and they target long-serving employees with high salaries? That’s what’s been going on in Canadian newsrooms for years. Anyone with 15+ years experience (the few who are left at this point) is in the crosshairs.
Comparing mass layoffs to a questionable individual termination?
It's no secret that mass layoffs usually get rid of lower performers or reduction of middle higher cost managers. If Lisa LaFlamme was part of a layoff that also impacted members of her team it would just be attributed as a cost cutting measure.
Those cuts you are talking about; these position reductions were generally not replaced.
But this is not what happened here. She was terminated in secret, and directly replaced by a much younger man of visible minority ready to step in on day 1 and CTV staff instructed to not mention her name. Her position was not cut and considering Omar Sachedina has himself been employed for 14 years and has the same role, the cost cutting argument attempt falls fairly flat as it would be a minimal reduction.
An executive that has been quoted as "who approved her silver hair" fired a 35 year tenured employee only a couple months in his tenure that wasn't part of a round of layoffs.
And let us also not forget about the official Bell PR announcement
Recognizing changing viewer habits, CTV recently advised LaFlamme that it had made the business decision to move its acclaimed news show, CTV NATIONAL NEWS, and the role of its Chief News Anchor in a different direction.
Nothing about cost cutting. Nothing about restructuring. It was about moving in a different direction based on changing viewer habits.
How do you move direction? From what to what? How can that statement be anything but discriminatory no matter how you try to rationalize it?
Last edited by Firebot; 08-19-2022 at 10:50 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
If she was told in June did she not have a final day? Could she have “signed off”? Or was she told in June but no final day was given and then was told one day it’s done?
She probably could have signed off but why would she. She was fired.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
I've made a post on the systemic racism a while ago about what women and people of minority go through that is widely accepted in the Canadian psyche. Exposure to the high level leadership and executive world can be incredibly eye opening as how prevalent racism, harassment and misogyny can exist at the top.
Trying to excuse discriminatory practices under the guise of business decisions is just garbage and reaffirming this toxic corporate behavior that needs to be stamped down and called out, instead of hiding under PR statements and apathy.
This just happened to be a very high profile and very visible case, but this stuff occurs behind the scene a lot.
Last edited by Firebot; 08-19-2022 at 03:39 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
I go back to the post that Kevin Newman had made and what other anchors said that this was perplexing. I fully understand cost cutting, mass layoffs, restructuring etc. That happens in business and is happening like wild fire in media. This appears different and very targeted. There is the most watched and highest rated news anchor in the country and then there is some low level radio or evening tv sports reporter on local media. It sucks for both but this is a different league.
In the Canadian sports media, it would be equivalent to Ron Maclean being just let go tomorrow morning for no apparent reason and no warning. Cost cutting, changing viewer habits and the changing sports landscape changing. That in some ways happened with Don Cherry and right or wrong, there was a reason given.
The entire brand of HNIC and CTV news revolve around the team in front of the camera, most notably the person in the #1 chair.
I don't know how much I believe that this was specifically sexism, ageism or something like that, they could have very easily laid off Sandi Rinaldo given she is in her 70's.
This seems strangely personal and a big difference in opinion. Regardless, I am sure everybody will move on and hopefully onto bigger and better things.
Are you really cutting costs if you lay off a high profile anchor that many people watch even if he / she makes $500k per year? $500k is a drop in the bucket compared to what Bell spends every year.
In the Canadian sports media, it would be equivalent to Ron Maclean being just let go tomorrow morning for no apparent reason and no warning.
The thing is, even if this happened, the company doesn't owe 'you' (The public) any explanation whatsoever. It's really none of your business why/how they are doing business. In the specific case you mentioned, Ron would be owed an explanation, and if it's not a good one, he could pursue legal redress.
I expect the same for Lisa. 'We' are not owed any explanation for her termination. If she feels she was unfairly terminated, she has recourse.
The Following User Says Thank You to WhiteTiger For This Useful Post:
