2 ex-workers sue Neiman Marcus over s...

2 ex-workers sue Neiman Marcus over sex tape

There are 174 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Sep 30, 2008, titled 2 ex-workers sue Neiman Marcus over sex tape. In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

Two former security employees at the Neiman Marcus department store in Northbrook who were fired last year for engaging in sex at work filed a lawsuit Tuesday alleging they were illegally videotaped.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 9
Next Last
Kevin

Deerfield, IL

#1 Oct 1, 2008
If they had been caught on tape stealing $$$, would they still file a lawsuit?

Certainly they knew that engaging in sexual activity while at work was wrong.

NM should dock them their pay for the time they were not doing their jobs.

Their lawsuit is ridiculous.
Moved

Woodridge, IL

#2 Oct 1, 2008
Okay so 2 adults had consentual sex that just happened to be at work. And their boss video taped them! I'd sue the store too. What a pervert. How humiliating for them.
Moved

Woodridge, IL

#5 Oct 1, 2008
And if my boyfriend worked with me I'd have sex at work too! If the store knew this was going on and took the time to set up a camera for god sakes then why didn't they just walk in on them instead. Face it. The boss was a pervert.
Why

Pompano Beach, FL

#6 Oct 1, 2008
Why would you think you have privacy at work? I wonder if they were on the clock when they had sex. So if they did get paid, would Neiman Marcus be their pimp or the john. How does that work?
Leroy McDonald

United States

#7 Oct 1, 2008
I'd say they weren't proficient in their field if getting caught "boinking" on the job.

Any true "security" person would've "swept" the room before "getting down".
Sorry

Pompano Beach, FL

#8 Oct 1, 2008
When you are employed and you do something that goes against company policy, there isn't always an "oh sorry didn't know we couldn't have sex in the office" apology.

I wonder if NM's handbook now covers the whole "you can't have sex in the loss prevention office."
JLO

Roselle, IL

#9 Oct 1, 2008
Hahahahaha, this has to be a joke, hahaha

So, you get paid to be a security guard at a company, during your time at work, at your company, you engage in sex acts, and BLAME YOUR EMPLOYER FOR BUSTING YOU??....this people and their attorneys have the galls to file a lawsuit? come on, I hope the Judge not only throws away this frivolous lawsuit, but charge heavily this jerks for court costs.

They blame their former manager for not being able to find jobs in that field, when THEY made the bad choice of having sex in an office at work, they showed improper judgement, come on, get real, they are not victims.
JLO

Roselle, IL

#10 Oct 1, 2008
Moved wrote:
And if my boyfriend worked with me I'd have sex at work too! If the store knew this was going on and took the time to set up a camera for god sakes then why didn't they just walk in on them instead. Face it. The boss was a pervert.
If your boss, with out proof, made allegations that you were having sex with your boyfriend at work, he would be liable, you could sue him; However, if he gets proof, via a video, there is no way to refute this evidence.....
mtv

Chicago, IL

#12 Oct 1, 2008
they got caught now they don't want to take responsibility. That's the problem with society now .
Moved

Woodridge, IL

#13 Oct 1, 2008
JLO wrote:
<quoted text>
If your boss, with out proof, made allegations that you were having sex with your boyfriend at work, he would be liable, you could sue him; However, if he gets proof, via a video, there is no way to refute this evidence.....
No. If my boss walked in on me doing this THAT is proof. And as I said he knew something was up which is why he set the Peeping Tom Camera up on the first place. What gave him the right to video tape it? AND THEN SHARE IT WITH PEOPLE ON AN ONLINE DATA BASE.
Robert

Providence, RI

#14 Oct 1, 2008
They should be working and not having sex at work. Whos
watching the store while the custumers and staff are steeling.
Kevin

Deerfield, IL

#15 Oct 1, 2008
Moved wrote:
Okay so 2 adults had consentual sex that just happened to be at work. And their boss video taped them! I'd sue the store too. What a pervert. How humiliating for them.
You've got to be kidding. "How humiliating for them?!!"

Would you pay YOUR employees to have sex when they were supposed to be working?

And if your boyfriend worked with you, you'd have sex with him at work too?

Please don't ever apply for a job at my company!
Real man of genius

United States

#16 Oct 1, 2008
Anyone else reminded of George Costanza right now? "Was that wrong? Is that sort of thing frowned upon?"
Larry Flynt

Alpharetta, GA

#17 Oct 1, 2008
Maybe they should look for jobs in the porno industry????
Kris

South Bend, IN

#18 Oct 1, 2008
Look, they lost their jobs because of what they did. That's not really what they are suing over. The suit seems to be that NM is now SHARING the video. THAT is a major problem.
joe

Saint Louis, MO

#19 Oct 1, 2008
Real man of genius wrote:
Anyone else reminded of George Costanza right now? "Was that wrong? Is that sort of thing frowned upon?"
I was thinking the same thing! LOL!
Judge Whopner

United States

#20 Oct 1, 2008
Please post their ages, photos, and type of acts they were involved in and I'll tell you if they're guily or not.
Not a lawyer

Appleton, WI

#21 Oct 1, 2008
1. You have no right to "privacy" in any areas of a workplace except bathrooms and locker rooms (and changing rooms for customers). Many employers (especially retail businesses) use video cameras internally...
2. certainly acts such as sex were "prohibited" by NM's policy. at the least, the employees weren't doing there job, so this was indeed a fire-able offense.
3. the real legal issue was wether the videotaping complied with applicable regulations and how this video footage may have been shared outside the firm.
Regardless, no sympathy for these two slackers. There is no excuse for their behavior. Even if NM acted innapropriately w.r.t. this videotaping, they don't deserve careers in security.
Jo Jo

United States

#22 Oct 1, 2008
Can't people come up with anything original?
Jay wrote:
It's Palin's fault!
Really

Chicago, IL

#23 Oct 1, 2008
Really these two people are suing for being videotapped. How did the two employees not know that they were being videotapped if both of them are security? So I am guessing that there lawyers opening statement will be the Constanza defense. "George Costanza: Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorence on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Neiman Marcus Groups Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Dog's birthday party to be held at Neiman Marcus (May '09) Feb '15 Robert Wayman 75
News Don't Pimp - Your Kids (Jan '14) Feb '14 jina wild 164
News Target CFO to testify before Senate on big data... (Jan '14) Jan '14 Caribou Barbie 1
News On Sale: Target + Neiman Marcus Holiday gift co... (Dec '12) Dec '12 FashionFiend 2
News Fiancee itemizes $24,000 in transfers from Hecker (Dec '10) Dec '10 Hoe hoe hoe 6
News Neiman Marcus Credit Cards Could Soon Be Canceled (Jul '08) Dec '09 Barbie 6
News Ex-employees sue Neiman Marcus over sex tape (Oct '08) Jul '09 Timmy 2
More from around the web