M$, Grant Thornton, others sued for sexual harassment, libel

[Alpine]

Enhanced Business Reporting Consortium flurry
A WOMAN is suing the Enhanced Business Reporting Corporation, Grant Thornton, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, the AICPA, Microsoft and named individuals working for these outfits in an Indiana court.



Susan Hinds alleges that she owned a consulting business in Indiana and was appointed to a committee to steer a business plan and to establish the Enhanced Business Reporting Consortium.

She was subsequently appointed as the CEO and president of the consortium by the founding partners, at which time she gave up running her consulting business.

She was given a contract and promised a monthly salary, life insurance and fringe benefits. She claims that she questioned "certain business practices" being conducted by the founding partners and sponsoring firms Grant Thornton, AICPA, Pricewaterhouse and Microsoft through the information they were receiving in the non-profit consortium.

She said she asked to review financial records and was denied access. But during her tenure with the steering committee and subsequently the consortium, she claims she was subjected to "sexually harassing conduct including lewd comments, emails, voice mails, unequal disciplinary actions, unequal committee appointments, unwanted physical contact, and requests for dates or social involvement" from members of the consortium. She said she complained about the harassment but the behaviour continued.

Just as she was about to complete the work on the business plan, Hinds claimed she was told she was to be terminated as the CEO, despite receiving no poor work performance evaluations.

She claims that the reason she lost the job was in retaliation for her questioning the business practices of the defendents and for reporting gender discrimination and sexual harassment.

She also claims that the defendants disseminated information about her which defamed her character, while the founder partners and/or their organisations made libellous statements and disseminated them. These actions impact on her professional reputation.

She wants the court to order she be made CEO or paid back pay and front pay instead, pay compensation, pay punitive damages, and be recognised as the author of the business plan which she claims the consortium is still using. She also wants a special letter of apology sent to all recipients of the business plan.

The INQuirer