21 Comments   
sports-braAn editor at Brides magazine was recently fired for unbuttoning her shirt in the confines of a Conde Nast office -- simply to show her newly augmented breasts to two of her close colleagues. Keep in mind, there was no nudity involved; she simply stripped down to her sports bra. Scandalous, right?

We asked Lemondrop readers whether her dismissal from the magazine was sabotage, discrimination, inappropriate work behavior -- or a little of all three.

Some readers were sticklers for office rules and insisted that the staffer's clothing removal was completely office-inappropriate. Mary says, "She was at work. Work implies that someone else is paying her to do her job and unless showing her boobs to coworkers is it -- then she should get fired and shown the door ASAP."

Silent Josh adds, "Seems clear cut to me. Ask any HR person, doesn't matter if it was behind closed doors or not, honestly, closed doors is usually a worse scenario from and HR perspective."

"Didn't the article say she was an editor?" says BromR. "That puts HR (and the company) in the position of 'You should have known better.' It sucks, but sometimes you have to use common sense, all it takes is one goody goody in the office to make the rest of our lives' hell!"

Captain midnight says, "Imagine if a man did this, there can not be double standards." (Reg jokes back, "If a man had a breast augmentation, I might ask to see it at work!")

Other readers are tired of how politically correct everybody tries to be in the workplace. Tie asks, "Who was harmed here? No one ... absolutely no one ... the two women ASKED to see her boobs..therefore no sexual harassment. No harm, no foul."

Trulyuniquelemming puts it in perspective for us: "An office isn't your private property, no, but if a Commander in Chief isn't impeached for getting serviced on company time, while leading the country, in the grander scheme of things, how bad is flashing your friends behind closed doors during a coffee break?"

Another commenter and veteran of the magazine publishing world claims it was a hatchet job. Ruby says, "The woman did nothing wrong. What she did, she did in privacy, and she did nothing inappropriate. The "concerned co-worker" who ran to HR was looking to get her fired, and -- surprise! -- did. Had a friend or two at Conde Nast years ago, and remembered what she told me about the working atmosphere there. Catty, over-competetitve, backbiting, and filled with fear. I imagine, from this article, that it hasn't changed."

PhilB puts it simply: "Two words: office bitches."

Plus, as mabenton points out, the lines are too blurry for this to have been legitimate cause behind her removal. "Would this woman have been fired if she asked her female assistant/friend to assist her with a malfunctioning undergarment? You know what I'm talking about ladies -- you need help pinning or something because youur wardrobe is malfunctioning. You would still be in some state of undress ... How many upper level business people have had to change their shirt/clothes behind closed doors while at work? That number I am sure would be staggerring. Should they also be fired for disrobing?"

Tell us! What do you think -- was this fair or not? Should she have been fired or simply given a warning?