B&H settles EEOC bias lawsuit for $4.3 million.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The first time I walked into B&H the hiring bias was so obvious that I joked to my friend, "This is legal?" Guess it isn't. 🙂
 
colker said:
i am not seeing discrimination when BH wants to employ friends/ relatives/ people they know from the local synagogue... but some people want to paint it as discrimination and racism: "i don't see people of color working there.." so what? it's witch hunt, liberal lynching, PC hypocrisy; idiocy bred out of resentment.
you can't buy at BH on a saturday? buy somewhere else. it's a free country.
Click to expand...

Wow, this thread has led to a huge misunderstanding. I am sorry that you feel I painted it that way and I appologize.

In my earlier posts, I tried to add clarity by saying that at one time about a decade ago there was a remarkable time when B&H had no persons of color working the floor. This could have been spun two ways, but somehow it wasn't.

Posted by others was the fact and observation that there is currently a lot of diversity. I tried to establish a time line by reporting when I noticed the change about five years ago. I feel my original posting was somewhat taken out of context as it was linked to other posts that came earlier in the tread.

I also reported, with others, that I have observed Latinos working as kitchen help in Chinese resturants and in one case as a waitor, that ran contrary to a presented analogy used in a prior posting.

In both instances I tried to remain objective by presenting and reporting fact, but I again appologize if this reporting came off as implied discrimination.

But I can UNDERSTAND how I could have triggered the response that has occured, although I was trying to add to the facts of this discussion, my statement. "Discrimination sucks!!!" framed the facts I presented and that was a mistake. Mistakenly I implied B&H was discriminating.

I was trying to be correct and not politically correct by simply adding facts. No political correctness was implied and for this I offer no appology.

Some of the criticism posted here I found harsh, but I also understand this is a passionate subject, and to a degree I deserved it, but perhaps not all of it. Some of the use of vague terms like "liberal" was just as gross an error as me writing "Discrimination sucks."

In other threads on this forum, I have defended both B&H and Adorama. I have told stories that involved extraordinary service that included kindness. In one example at B&H a sales person offered to print out a price quote that included a Leica rebate so I could use it as leverage to negociate a deal at Adorama on a used lense. There are many other favorable stories that I posted. I find it remarkable that someone would consider me biased against B&H or anyone. I have nothing bad to say about B&H only praise.

I would ask everyone here to read through this whole thread again. A lot can be learned.

Calzone
 
Henry, meanwhile, had a fantastic opportunity to explain thing ...🙁 lets hope the place doesn´t turn into another 🙂 camera. You just don´t see this happening at Foto Care or Lens and Repro😀.
 
rlouzan said:
Henry, meanwhile, had a fantastic opportunity to explain thing ...
Click to expand...

Henry handled himself in a very courteous and professional manner. He shouldn't be "explaining things" about the settlement. It is what it is and, honestly, it doesn't seem to be much of our business to expect an explanation. If any one of us are really curious, we should be asking the owner of B&H if he/she wants to tell us what went on.
 
So why did he show up in the first place?😉

Gumby said:
Henry handled himself in a very courteous and professional manner. He shouldn't be "explaining things" about the settlement. It is what it is and, honestly, it doesn't seem to be much of our business to expect an explanation. If any one of us are really curious, we should be asking the owner of B&H if he/she wants to tell us what went on.
Click to expand...
 
I don't think it's Henry's job to explain or discuss that EEOC bias lawsuit.

He did get asked questions that he either avoided or just didn't feel he had the need to answer though; and that's completely his prerogative.

Dave
 
dcsang said:
Or he can do an advanced search here and see how many threads Henry's been involved in based on his username (aka "henryp" ).

One can then draw their own conclusions on his involvement.
Click to expand...

... or, if he has been around the various internet forums, recall that almost everyone knows Henry... he's been active in many forums. I actually respect the way he represents his company without ever giving the impression that he is pushing sales. He's a very "known quantity" to those who have been around for a while.

p.s. (for equal opportunity purposes): Helen's nice and professional too.
 
Of course he can. But this is a discussion forum. You put a comment into the forum implying that Henry, he who can take care of himself, should have explained something to us.. and we are now discussing your comment. 🙂
 
Not shoul, but could😀.
No es lo mismo estar bebido, que estar bebiendo😱.

Regards,
RLouzan

Gumby said:
Of course he can. But this is a discussion forum. You put a comment into the forum implying that Henry, he who can take care of himself, should have explained something to us.. and we are now discussing your comment. 🙂
Click to expand...
 
dcsang said:
The key is to not just selectively pull out what you want to read but to read it all in context. That, to me, is what was lacking in your original "counter point"

Dave
Click to expand...
the key? thanks, teach/prof/dad/mom.

"I am a visible minority - or some would say visible majority - but anyway;"

that's the part i left out. notice how it has absolutely nothing to do with what i was talking about and doesn't change the context of what i quoted in any way at all? if you can't follow along without meaningless tidbits of the conversation thrown in, then i don't know what to tell you.

anyway, concerning henry and helen, they're both excellent resources who seem to come under fire from people who miss the whole point of their being in places like this. i've interacted with both of them on another photography message board and they've always supplied useful information to those in need with the utmost courtesy and professionalism (and pretty sharp wit, too). a legal representative of b&h henry is not, so expecting him to give his two cents on this situation and potentially jeapordize his job and to rag on him for not doing so just shows the maturity and intelligence level of those responsible.

racism is awful, prejudice is horrible, b&h settled out of court for unknown reasons, and i really could use a beer. that's the facts, jack.
 
No se puede ser más papista que el Papa:angel:.


sos314 said:
the key? thanks, teach/prof/dad/mom.

"I am a visible minority - or some would say visible majority - but anyway;"

that's the part i left out. notice how it has absolutely nothing to do with what i was talking about and doesn't change the context of what i quoted in any way at all? if you can't follow along without meaningless tidbits of the conversation thrown in, then i don't know what to tell you.

anyway, concerning henry and helen, they're both excellent resources who seem to come under fire from people who miss the whole point of their being in places like this. i've interacted with both of them on another photography message board and they've always supplied useful information to those in need with the utmost courtesy and professionalism (and pretty sharp wit, too). a legal representative of b&h henry is not, so expecting him to give his two cents on this situation and potentially jeapordize his job and to rag on him for not doing so just shows the maturity and intelligence level of those responsible.

racism is awful, prejudice is horrible, b&h settled out of court for unknown reasons, and i really could use a beer. that's the facts, jack.
Click to expand...
 
Al,

Now that you mention it🙄, if I remember correctly, PDN ran a story about a panoramic picture of B&H´s lunch room , for an add a few years ago. And, yes, indeed it was Kosher😀.

Probably from the old store. Can someone unearth that photograph?

Regards,
RLouzan

Al Kaplan said:
They probably don't want any non kosher food brought into the lunch room either (if they have one).
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom