* Tribune…
The campaign worker who disrupted House Speaker Michael Madigan’s political operations with sexual harassment allegations against a top lieutenant filed a federal lawsuit late Wednesday afternoon, saying her decision to report the behavior cost her a chance to advance in his organization.
Alaina Hampton, who first told the Tribune last month of receiving inappropriate texts from Madigan aide Kevin Quinn, contends in the lawsuit that her effort to stop his unwanted advances effectively prevented her from getting further work on Democratic campaigns.
Hampton sued the Democratic Party of Illinois, which Madigan chairs, and his political fund, Friends of Michael J. Madigan, alleging retaliation for “asserting her rights to be free from unlawful harassment and a sexually hostile work environment by failing to hire her to work as a political consultant for the 2018 campaign cycle.”
The lawsuit seeks $350,000, in addition to attorney’s fees.
* From the lawsuit…
The Madigan Defendants retaliated against Ms. Hampton for asserting her rights to be free from unlawful harassment and a sexually hostile work environment by, among other ways, failing to hire her to work as a political consultant for the 2018 campaign cycle.
The Madigan Defendants had no legitimate reason for failing to hire and/or allow Ms. Hampton to work as a political staffer and/or campaign manager and the stated reasons for their employment actions were pretexts to hide unlawful employment actions as alleged below. […]
As a result of the Madigan Defendants’ discriminatory and retaliatory conduct, Ms. Hampton has suffered injury to her career as well as other injuries for which she is entitled to actual, compensatory and punitive damages, as well as equitable relief pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1964
* Some tweets from today’s presser…
* More…
Madigan’s attorney said last month there was an internal investigation. Kulwin said he wants proof.
“Let’s see it,” [Hampton’s attorney Shelly Kulwin] said. “What was this internal investigation that led you to conclude that everything was OK or not OK? What was your response to the investigation? Who participated in this investigation? Who was interviewed in this investigation? Because to our knowledge the investigation was a 40-minute chat in a Starbucks.”
While it’s not part of the lawsuit yet, Kulwin said the legal team is aware of people trying to dig up dirt on Hampton.
“There were questions raised about phone calls being made trying to dig up dirt on Alaina,” Kulwin said. “They were calling her male colleagues and asking what type of bars she goes to, who does she know, who does she have a relationship with. Outrageous stuff.”
The attorney said he plans to investigate those issues further.
“I can’t say it was directed by anybody yet,” Kulwin said. “I can’t say it was sponsored by anybody yet. We don’t know that at this time and I’m not saying that. We just know it happened and we know who did it, we believe, and we’re going to look into that during our case.”
*** UPDATE 1 *** ILGOP…
Yesterday, the Chicago Tribune reported that former Madigan campaign worker Alaina Hampton filed a federal lawsuit against the Democratic Party of Illinois and Friends of Michael J. Madigan, political committees chaired by House Speaker Mike Madigan.
Hampton is suing for damages because she was prevented from doing future political work for Madigan after she blew the whistle on sexual harassment within Madigan’s political organizations.
J.B. Pritzker, Mike Madigan’s candidate for governor, has said he “believes” women when it comes to telling their stories on being victims of sexual harassment and abuse, but he doesn’t really mean it.
Now that Hampton has filed suit against Madigan, Pritzker faces yet another stark choice between his political patron and the people of Illinois. Will Pritzker side with the plaintiff, Alaina Hampton, or the defendant, Mike Madigan.
Make no mistake - J.B. Pritzker is part and parcel of Mike Madigan’s political machine, and his continued silence makes him complicit in Madigan’s corruption. Pritzker has already made his position known.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Madigan’s office…
“The pleading is being reviewed by counsel. However, I can assure you that the Democratic Party of Illinois and the Friends of MJM have not retaliated against Ms. Hampton in any way,” said Madigan spokesman Steve Brown.
* Related…
* Contractors that want city work would need to have sexual harassment policies in place, under new Chicago plan
- Perrid - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:35 pm:
To me, it’s a long way from the alderman offering her a promotion to keep her quiet to firing her. If that’s what happened it’s not too bright. Interesting to hear the arguments.
- Rutro - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:36 pm:
Sad they couldn’t settle this, not good for MJM inc. et al when the depositions start about the timing of the investigation, retaliation etc. If they want to do better going forward, they should’ve resolved this. A 350k demand isn’t millions they don’t have.
- RNUG - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:39 pm:
So who is financing this lawsuit?
And will the Democrat response claim she was a contractor or volunteer?
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:41 pm:
===So who is financing this lawsuit?===
Appears to be on a contingency basis. So, Madigan finances it if he loses.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:43 pm:
First big test for Pritzker as nominee is the election of state party chair.
What is the good reason for not replacing Madigan?
- L.A. - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:49 pm:
not surprised by this lawsuit. this was predictable
- Perrid - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:49 pm:
The suit says she tried to get hired to work on filling Stratton’s seat and was told Madigan was not involved in the race, and then says that was a lie and someone else was hired to do that job. Was Madigan involved in that race? Who was hired to fill that position, if so?
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:50 pm:
===Was Madigan involved in that race?===
Depends on when she asked the question. He eventually did get involved.
- Winnin’ - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:53 pm:
This will drag out until after November. Much of the plaintiff’s claims have already been aired.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:55 pm:
=== they should’ve resolved this ===
I think the Madigan organization will have a strong case to defend this lawsuit. The timing from the complaint doesn’t add up. It says she was constructively terminated in April of 2017 because of the anxiety of working with Kevin Quinn, which is the time she began working for Marie Newman. Then she stopped working for Newman and shortly thereafter wrote the letter to the Speaker. Then, in November and December, she was inquiring about working another campaign for the organization even though Kevin Quinn was still there. It doesn’t make sense to me.
- Tired - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 12:55 pm:
Interesting she filed day after Chris Kennedy lost. Otherwise she would still be working..
- A guy - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:05 pm:
This is serious business. All these timing questions are a bit presumptive. It’s not always about when something is reported by the alleged or real victim. It’s about when they are acknowledged. I don’t know this young woman, but my perception about her and her actions are several times more credible than Silverstein’s accuser. She is not going away, and there aren’t nutty communications reported between her and the alleged abuser. In her case the abuser possesses the nutty communication. Woman are and have been slow to come forward because the “system” has re-victimized them. This case may change that. I sure hope so.
- Rutro - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:07 pm:
They may have a great defense, but what price is a 7 hour video depositions of the entire crew, subpoena’s to people who are generally careless how they communicate, who assigns the work, who assigns the jobs, etc? Bruce would very much like this litigated.
- Winnin’ - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:17 pm:
Hint from Madigan/Brown: We have no reason to settle.
- Rutro - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:23 pm:
@winnin
Maybe, but when Steve brown is being deposed about how he knows that, and all of his correspondence And they are paying counsel to defend it, I doubt it.
- Winnin’ - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:28 pm:
@rutro
Well, Brown is Madigan’s press spokesman, not his chief operating officer.
- walker - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:47 pm:
The legal case might be an uphill battle for Hampton, but the PR impact on MJM and DPI is bad regardless.
- Ron - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:49 pm:
Maybe this will finally be the end of Madigan. One can hope.
- SaulGoodman - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:56 pm:
**Interesting she filed day after Chris Kennedy lost. Otherwise she would still be working..**
Huh? She didn’t work for Chris. She actually was working for Degnen who just beat Fritchey.
- JB13 - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 1:57 pm:
Believe all women.
But not that one.
Because, priorities.
- Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 3:04 pm:
JB13-
I don’t think one should believe all women.
I don’t believe Rotheimer
Her Perfidy
Her unfounded accusations
destroyed Silverstein
I do feel
Adamant
About giving women the benefit of the doubt
It does go along with the whole
Innocent until proven guilty concept
Hampton has her day in court.
I’m very encouraged for her
The difference between
Hampton and Rotheimer
Is huge.
- Interesting - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 4:36 pm:
She is 2 for 2 in tough races, appears quite adept at using the news media and how to leverage legal strategy.
Maybe MJM should be employing more people like her instead of folks with room temperature IQ’s like the Brothers Quinn.
- A Jack - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 9:04 pm:
I read the text messages. I personally didn’t see anything sexual in any of them. Quinn was persistent in asking her out for a drink, but she wasn’t fired over her refusal.
She quit and then wanted to be hired back. They said no, so she sued.
- George - Thursday, Mar 22, 18 @ 9:44 pm:
“I don’t know this young woman, but my perception about her and her actions are several times more credible than Silverstein’s accuser.”
So, when did Mike Madigan learn to text?
- Shytown - Friday, Mar 23, 18 @ 11:42 am:
== I read the text messages. I personally didn’t see anything sexual in any of them. ==
First, wake the fudge up.
They were sexual. Very sexual, but it’s more about power and he attempted to use his power as her supervisor to coerce her into going out with him multiple times.