Harassment Charges Filed Against Label

The federal employment rights office has charged Virgin Records with “creating a sexually hostile work environment,” following complaints from a female employee that her boss sexually harassed her.

The charge by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, filed Sept. 28 in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, marks a rare bid by the federal government to examine the work environments in the record industry, which has repeatedly been embarrassed in harassment scandals since 1991.

“In light of the historic record of the entertainment industry as a whole and because we found this to be an egregious case, we decided to remedy the problem and prevent it in the future,” said Anna Park, regional attorney for the EEOC, who filed the lawsuit. “Employers must realize that the day is long gone when a manager can use his authority over an employee to extort sexual favors.”

According to the complaint, Stephanie Velasquez, an employee in the label’s computer department, was subjected to sexual propositions, unwelcome touching and derogatory comments by her boss Walter Lawson.

When Velasquez refused his advances, the government alleged, he became hypercritical of her work, cut off her access to information and tools needed for her job and laid the groundwork for her discharge. Velasquez complained to the label’s human resources department, and within hours was told by Lawson that she had been fired, EEOC lawyers alleged.

Virgin, which is owned by British music giant EMI Group, has not responded to the complaint in court.

A spokesman said, “We take allegations of this nature very seriously. The complaint came to us over one year ago, at which time we conducted an immediate and thorough investigation. As there is now pending litigation involved, consistent with our company policy, we are not able to comment on this further.”

The spokesman said Lawson had been terminated months ago for reasons unrelated to the EEOC complaint.

Lawson could not be reached for comment.

The lawsuit, which charges the company with sexual harassment and retaliation, seeks Velasquez’s back pay, unspecified monetary damages and a court order requiring the label to institute company-wide training on anti-discrimination laws.