Article appeared in The Buffalo Jewish Review, July 2, 2004
When Amaani Lyle interviewed for a writer’s assistant position with Adam Chase and Gregory Malins, executive producers and writers on the NEC television show “Friends,” she stated on her application that she could type 80 words per minute, and was hired without being tested.
Lyle alleged that she complained continually to Chase and Malins and other producers and writers about the lack of black characters on “Friends.” She also presented evidence that she was subjected—almost daily—to racial and sexual harassment, which included Chase, Malins and supervising producer Andrew Reich constantly engaging in graphic discussions about sex and regularly mocking African-Americans.
Chase and Malins fired Lyle after four months, claiming that she could not type fast enough, and thus failed to accurately note important dialogue and jokes during writers’ meetings. A white male writers’ assistant who was hired with Lyle was also fired, allegedly for the same reason. Lyle asserted claims under the State Fair Employment and Housing Act and common law public policy for race and sex discrimination, racial and sexual harassment, and retaliation for complaining about the show’s lack of African–American actors.
The defendants, Warner Brothers Television Productions, maintained that Lyle was terminated for a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason—poor job performance—and that, in any event, the purported comments and jokes were not severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment. They also maintained that because “Friends” is about the lives of young, sexually active adults, lewd and vulgar jokes and comments in the writers’ room were an indispensable means to developing gags, dialogue and story lines for the show.
The California Court of Appeals concluded that there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find the writers’ room on “Friends” was a hostile or offensive work environment for a woman, and that “a jury could find that the sexual conduct in the case particularly severe because, Lyle was a captive audience.”
The Court also held that the defendants’ argument that the sexually explicit conversations in the writers’ room were part of the creative process for the show, and thus the terms and conditions of the writers assistant’s job, did not provide grounds for dismissal of Lyle’s claims. However, the theory is not completely irrelevant, it ruled. Labeling the argument that “creative necessity” defense and likening it to the “business necessity” defense, the Court said “such a defense finds support in the California Supreme Court’s definition of sexual harassment as conduct of a type unnecessary to the management of the employer’s business.”
It further explained that within certain limits defendants might be able to convince a jury that the artistic process for producing episodes of “Friends” necessitates conduct that might be unacceptable in other context. It is interesting to note that the context may make a difference in what is considered a hostile environment and that the, Court did leave the door open to a defense of creative necessity.
So stay tuned.
