Lucy Meadmore: Like a Virgin...
Melani Robinson: Is He Toy Worthy? Looking for Mr. Goodvibe
Debrahlee Lorenzana, standing at 5-foot-6, weighing 125 lbs. and with curves in all the right places, can be categorized as your quintessential hottie. However, should she have been fired for her good looks? According to Citibank, the 33-year-old single mom had a figure that was just too distracting to her male co-workers, so the bank let her go in the summer of 2009. (Her bosses cite low performance standards as the reason for dismissal.) And now Lorenzana is suing Citigroup for indecent disposal.
"Men are kind of drawn to her," Tanisha Ritter, Lorenzana's former colleague and friend, told New York City's Village Voice. "I've seen [them] turn into complete idiots around her. But it's not her fault that they act this way, and it shouldn't be her problem."
But what's particularly galling is the "racy" attire her supervisors forbade her to wear.
The former business banker said that she was wearing turtlenecks, pencil skirts, suits and heels, which was all kosher according to Citibank's dress code, but were the very garments cited on her personal What Not to Wear list.
"She should not wear classic high-heeled business shoes, as this purportedly drew attention to her body in a manner that was upsetting to her easily distracted male managers," Lorenzana's lawsuit stated.
While she tried to tone down "her look" by going to work with no makeup and keeping her hair naturally curly, as opposed to blow drying it straight, she wound getting reprimanded for that as well.
Lorenzana said her supervisor at the branch gave her such a hard time she was never given the training to do something as simple as opening a checking account. Other allegations: He put her on probation for allegedly bringing in little business, though plenty of employees were apparently getting in line.
After sending several complaints to HR and higher-level executives at Citibank, Lorenzana finally received a transfer, to a telemarketing position. A month later she was dismissed because, the bank alleged, "Lorenzana wasn't fit for the culture of Citibank."
Now that you know the story, it's time to discuss. Can you really be too hot to work for a bank?
More wronged women on Lemondrop:
+ Hooters Forcing 132-lb. Waitress to Lose Weight
+ Saudi Arabia Tries to Ban Women From Being on TV
+ Lesbian Date Almost Cancels Prom
Comments:
Add a comment
Thursday 03 June
By JamieReed
OMG I cant believe this. The thought of firing someone because she's "too hot" instead of firing the dudes who couldn't get anything done because they were thinking with the wrong head is appalling.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By A LOLing person
LAWL at the first two comments
"Women should not be fired for naturally looking good, but men should be fired for naturally wanting to look at beautiful women"
and the second, well, I never though I'd see someone genuinely try and compare sexists to Islam Extremists, but obviously people can actually be that stupid.
Thursday 03 June
By Rob
I agree she should not be fired just based on her looks. However, I should honestly say that I would not be able to concentrate very well with a woman like in the office.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By hd
If anyone is going to agree that women who are "too hot" should be fired because the poor men just can't help themselves and can't work well around her... and if you think it's okay to micromanage their attire to that degree (dressing like a slut, that's one thing, but proper business attire?)... then you agree with the extremists in the islamic community who believe that women should wear burkas to hide their entire bodies, because those poor men just can't help themselves.
Our society trains women (and young girls!) that we have to be sexy to survive and get ahead. Sexy sexy sexy! More important than brains or talent, we have to LOOK GOOD. Until, of course, you're fired for actually living up to society's expectations.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By AJ
Something tells me that there is much more to this story. Citibank is a very large company with, I'm sure, and very active HR and Legal Department similar to my government job. There is no way in hell the HR and Legal Depts, who are always involved in an adverse action termination, would allow management to let her go unless they had a substantial file with hard evidence that she was underperforming.
My bet is that she is a terrible employee who wasn't cutting it in the position she was hired. She was transferred to a position that she hated, so she underperformed a little more. At one point or another, maybe her manager pointed out that her attire might be distracting to the male employees. So she got herself fired and is looking for her big payday.
Unless Citibank has a terrible HR Dept (doubtful), she's not going to see a dime.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By Ben
I agree with you; I doubt that a large corporation like Citibank would fire this woman for such ridiculous reasons and leave themselves open to a lawsuit. It's not impossible, of course--corporations sometimes do idiotic things (see British Petroleum). But I do think it's likely there's more here than meets the eye.
Sunday 06 June
By Teresa
I agree so much with that comment. A small firm can get away with what they liked but with a large company and an HR department they have to watch their step.
I guess that she was fired for being difficult to work with and I read apparently she tried a similar trick with the same company while working there. Just out to make a living from suing employers.
Thursday 03 June
By paul
yes. women are capable of making men loose control of themselvs simply by dressing in what would normally be considered appropriate attire. this is likely because of fantasies of having sex with a secretary, nurse, flight attendent, and other such things. from the discription of this woman i would say that if she still wants to work a the bank either have her wear things that make her look unatractive, things like big sweaters to cover up her curves, or give her a room to herself with windows that look outside of the building but none that allow for her co-workers to be distracted by her. also this is rather childish. her employers should know that she can only do so much work when they constantly call her in and repremand her for being too good looking.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By katie
I'm not shocked. A similar issue happened with a nearby company in my town. Except it was the wife of the manager in charge telling her husband that the young woman needed to be fired. I'm sure there is more to the story, but I feel that it could very well be a repeat of the same situation.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By steve
sounds like BS to me. Citibank is being quiet till the matter is settled, guess will find out then.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By Sage
Oh yeah, let's not, you know give a seminar on sexual harassment or punish the men for making jackasses of themselves for treating a female coworker like a piece of meat, because they're men after all and they can't help it!
BULL CRAP.
How about we stop saying that "men will be men" and start asking them to quit thinking with their dicks and start acting like human beings instead of horny animals. In fact, how about we lay it straight with both genders? How about we all treat each other like people instead of sexual objects? Maybe we could ALL get a little more work done that way.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By Vincent
I'm certian that there's more to this story than Lorenzana simply being "too hot to handle." I wouldn't be surprised if she's the heart of some major drama issues within the company. Or it could also be her own method of attacking the company as a vengeful ex-employee, as this is a serious problem employers face anyway (I work in IT and see it when people leave all the time, stealing information or deleting important work). I wouldn't put it beyond someone to go to a lawyer and say "They fired me because they were jealous of my beauty."
Much like what AJ has said before, the HR department of Citibank fully understands the issues with firing people and they wouldn't play games with managers of individual banks and their personal drama like this.
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By tdave
did she just happen to have that professional photo around the house?
Reply
Thursday 03 June
By Rich
She wasnt too hot she just dressed like a slut. And now she wants attention and a million dollars.
Reply
Friday 04 June
By brooke
Good luck with that lawsuite lady. I bet she signed an employement at will contact when she started which pretty much says they can fire you for whatever they want. There is a lot more to this story, i'm sure of it. If she was following the dress code there woudln't be a problem.
Reply
Friday 04 June
By zero
Firing her rather than the blokes who couldn't think straight around her is clearly morally wrong, but from a business sense it's far more efficient and doing it the other way round...
Reply
Friday 04 June
By Andre
This is not that add really. Lots of people will try controlling women with how they are allowed or not allowed to dress. I highly doubt she was "to Hot" and much more likely they just did not like her for whatever.
Reply
Friday 04 June
By David Lee
To some of the other commenters: I can see how it's tempting to say "I'm sure that's not the real issue", because it seems ridiculous that a company managed to behave like this.
However, in the article it states that she was given a ban on wearing several items that were in fact very plain and *part of the company dress code*. This wasn't some issue she made up after the fact - this was an actual issue at the time, and the company was being wonderfully self-contradictory.
I think most of the commenter's speculation is rationalising, because they don't want to believe a big company could do that. Frankly, I think a big company is exactly where it would happen, because that's where you can play office politics by shuffling paper around, instead of having to actually know the people you're fighting on a personal level.
Reply
Friday 04 June
By RF900flyer
She'd brighten my day.
Reply
Friday 04 June
By DW
Umm the lady already had a photo spread ready to post on the web. Anyone who thinks there isn't more to it is naive.
Reply