Amy-Erin Blakely Busts Devereux Foundation with Large Breasts Lawsuit

Amy Erin Blakely "No woman should ever be subjected to such sexist and derogatory remarks," said Amy-Erin Blakely, who retained renowned civil rights Attorney Gloria Allred to file a gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against The Devereux Foundation, Inc. on her behalf. "I am a highly competent professional woman and I asked only to be judged on my merit," Blakely continued. "Instead, I seemed to be judged on my looks and the size of my breasts. That is wrong and that is why I have decided to file my case. I refuse to be a victim of the Devereux Foundation any longer."

According to the Devereux Foundation's website, "Devereux is a leading nonprofit behavioral health organization that supports many of the most under-served and vulnerable members of our communities. Founded in 1912 by Helena Devereux, we operate a comprehensive national network of clinical, therapeutic, educational and employment programs and services that positively impact the lives of tens of thousands of individuals and families every year. We also focus on research-based prevention initiatives that help children and adolescents develop resilience and strong emotional and social health."

No company should tolerate vulgar, sexual, discriminatory comments and then fire someone after she complains about them. But when the offender is a charitable organization like the Devereux Foundation, which claims "Inspiring Hopes. Empowering Lives," it seems particularly disconcerting.


The wrong focus

Blakely claims that not all employees lived by those company ideals. She was employed there from September 1996 until Oct. 28, 2009. She has a bachelor's and a master's in business, and received numerous promotions and raises. At the time of her termination -- which came the day after she filed her second internal grievance against the company -- she was assistant executive director and oversaw approximately 900 staff members. Some of them seemed more focused on her physical attributes than her professional ones.

If Blakely's suit can be proved, she will be awarded compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorney's fees. Blakely alleges that:

  • She was told that other employees complained that they could not concentrate in meetings because all they saw were her "big breasts."
  • Someone in management talked about how large her breasts were and that she needed to "hide them."
  • She learned that she had been nicknamed "Big Tittie Baby."
  • She learned that someone in management wanted to sit next to her "so he can look at her big titties" and that he "loves big titties."
  • She was also told that a high level executive asked to play tennis with her so that he could watch her in her tennis skirt and "see her big titties bouncing around."
  • A false allegation was circulated that Ms. Blakely attended a board meeting where she was a presenter with her "boobs hanging out." In fact she had worn a brown turtleneck sweater and a jacket to the meeting.
  • She was told by management "you have very large breasts -- so does my wife, and I have talked to her about you and your breasts."
  • She was also told that "you should wear loose fitting clothes or try to hide your breasts because they are too distracting."
  • She was told that she was "too sensual" for further advancement to the position of executive director.

No woman in the workplace should be forced to suffer sexually discriminatory and disparaging remarks about her breasts, or their size. It is also a violation of the law to prevent a woman from advancement because she is considered "too sensual," commented Allred.

Allred and Blakley spoke with Fox 11 News about the complaint.



In response, the Devereux Foundation issued a statement saying, "We carefully investigated and concluded her claims are entirely without merit. They are either spurious or twisted in content and context to be deliberately inflammatory. We did not terminate her for the reasons she claims in her suit, and she was not discriminated against. We plan to vigorously defend against her complaints."

Does Blakely Have a Case?
Absolutely36134 (63.4%)
No Way11270 (19.8%)
Not Sure Yet9610 (16.9%)
"

Allred counters, "We have every confidence that Amy will prevail in court and that Devereux's response will be seen to be spurious, completely without merit and inflammatory."

She further comments that, "Amy-Erin Blakely is demonstrating a great deal of courage in speaking out publicly about what she suffered on the job. She is doing this so that no other woman will have to suffer what she had to endure while she was employed by Devereux Foundation. It is 2010. It is long overdue for women to be judged on their merits rather than the size of their breasts."

Remember this? Debrahlee Lorenzana: Too Sexy for Her Job?


Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

385 Comments

Filter by:
SynValorum

bump

September 21 2013 at 12:55 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
SynValorum

That's hot!

September 21 2013 at 12:55 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
thepokermonkey1

Gloria Allred is a blood ******* man hater. Amy Erin looks like a freaking man. And really sorry, but she was 'ashamed of her body' when people were commenting on how nice her tittles were? yeah...we are all buying that one. These kind of horseshiiit lawsuits are what make filing legitimate lawsuits so difficult for 'actual' victims.

May 13 2011 at 3:49 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
Katie W.

There is a case against Devereux. I was a patient at the Devereux in Pine Hills Florida. I believe that there is discrimination from this place. I was there for 7 months. I was attacked by two of the girls two days in a row (a Friday and Saturday) that I lived on a pod with, and when the staff finally decided to break it up, I wanted to call the police because I was in fear of my life and they told me that if I called I would be punished. I spent 7 months there being over medicated, and having no help.

November 23 2010 at 8:29 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
bob

I love the breasts. Plump and firm. To hold one in each hand, preparing to enjoy them. Poke and prod them...right before throwing them in the pan at 375....Ahh...chicken. What were you thinking I meant?

November 19 2010 at 7:23 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
Thinkbeforeyouspeak

Zach---

You couldn't be more wrong!

It's not productive at all to HER to file the lawsuit. Sexual Harassment Lawsuits never have a personal gain. The only gain is making a change for that company and setting the example.

Whatever monetary awards she will get as damages, the company is also required by law to pay a very large percentage of the TOTAL damages awarded to whatever specific population they damaged as a result of the harassment. That's why it's so interesting that the company itself is harassing her because she is a woman, when they are in place to protect the rights of women.

Whatever you believe, whatever the outcome, whatever her work ethic or record, she is no longer hirable by any company because of this lawsuit. Not legally....but no one hires a person who files a complaint or lawsuit against a company. She is a woman in her...what? 30's? 40's?---too old to start over by going back to school for a career change, and too young to retire, and too far into the center of life to wait it out for a better day, which because of the lawsuit will never happen.

Even if she wins...the few measly pennies she gets from her part of the TOTAL damages awarded will just barely be enough to maintain the lifestyle she has had for a few years until she can find another job. There is no personal gain even if she is just trying to retaliate as a disgruntled employee.

Also , no one "hinted" anything. They flat out told her in every limited disgusting way they could think of.
These were the actual complaints....didn't you read any of the article?
• She was told that other employees complained that they could not concentrate in meetings because all they saw were her "big breasts."
• Someone in management talked about how large her breasts were and that she needed to "hide them."
• She learned that she had been nicknamed "Big Tittie Baby."
• She learned that someone in management wanted to sit next to her "so he can look at her big titties" and that he "loves big titties."
• She was also told that a high level executive asked to play tennis with her so that he could watch her in her tennis skirt and "see her big titties bouncing around."
• A false allegation was circulated that Ms. Blakely attended a board meeting where she was a presenter with her "boobs hanging out." In fact she had worn a brown turtleneck sweater and a jacket to the meeting.
• She was told by management "you have very large breasts -- so does my wife, and I have talked to her about you and your breasts."
• She was also told that "you should wear loose fitting clothes or try to hide your breasts because they are too distracting."
• She was told that she was "too sensual" for further advancement to the position of executive director

Now as far the reason she was fired....I find it a little more than odd that this company had no problem with her for 13 years, promotion after promotion, raise after raise, performance review after performance review, and then after 13 years when she complained that someone made an inappropriate comment---she was fired because her claims were "either spurious or twisted in content and context to be deliberately inflammatory." Whatever attitude she had before then or shortly before then...wouldn't you have been a little uncomfortable if your company created a hostile work environment for you?

No offense, but no one here gives a rat's ass about your father or his credentials or what you obviously do not know about the legal system. There is never a winner in any discrimination case based on race, gender, sex, age, medical condition, religion or anything else. I have to wonder about all the people who first filed cases because they were black, Jewish, gay, pregnant, or had AIDS and think that if they were only in it for personal gain then we would have one seriously F**ed-up country right now. It's never easy to prove, but the point is to give awareness to the situation and create a building block in the right direction. Everyone takes a hit, not just the specific victim, but moreover, each population affected by discrimination. Whatever is decided on this case, women will be both negatively and positively affected in the workplace based on the outcome for years. I seriously doubt that all these comments went completely unnoticed by anyone else in the work place, whether or not they agree with her, and I don't believe at all that she was the only one that was offended. She is more than likely just the first to publicly say something.

Tourette's Syndrome? You have

November 19 2010 at 2:05 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Thinkbeforeyouspeak's comment
doomonyou

Hey, let it all out, don't hold back, let us know how you really feel...

November 19 2010 at 4:39 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
Steve

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding on the board - or at least by "Thinkbeforeyouspeak"...

Comments which are welcomed or do not cause the recipient to fee offended when said, so matter how lewd, do not fit the definition of harassment. An essential element of harassment is the behavior was not welcome or was offensive TO THE RECIPIENT. It doesn't matter if everyone else in the world would have found the behavior offensive if the recipient didn't then it's not harassing to them and thus, not harassment. This doesn't mean a company couldn't or wouldn't punish someone under the guise of "sexual harassment" or even fire them for it. What this means is that courts require evidence of conduct being unwelcome at the time it was done - not afterward when there's something to be gained by being offended. Hell, of course she's offended now, her complaint depends on it.

What this means, is that whatever was said to this woman, if it wasn't offensive to HER WHEN IT WAS SAID then then it wasn't (public law) harassment. She can't come back after being fired and say oh, by the way, I was harassed even though I brought the behavior on and welcomed it myself now I've lost my job let's reassess things. Perhaps it worked for her to flaunt her boobs then and she'd trying to make it work for her to call their reaction to her behavior harassment now she's lost her job. Basic opportunistic behavior IF that's what she'd doing - the court will decide.

It's a grown up world and we're all discriminated against for something or other.



November 19 2010 at 1:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
EG

The Devereux Foundation offers the BEST residential care for challenged people all over this country. What concerns me the most is that if money is won by Erin and her attorney,the residents at Devereux will be the ones to suffer. Why should any monies go to their own personal advancements-what a double standard! As a professional in the mental health field, why would she put ANY sum of money in her own pocket and that of her attorney? Regretably, Erin and her attorney are more concerned with monetary gains for themselves,than the impact they will have on those less fortunate than ourselves.The ramifications extend beyond the present lawsuit and will impact these clients in a multitude of scenarios. It is really unforgivable to take from those unable to defend themselves.

November 19 2010 at 10:19 AM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
V

I come from a family of very flat chested women; until me. I was shapd (literally) like Sophia Loren. There was nothing I could do no matter how hard I tried. I was told I was a sexpot, that I should be out there getting it nightly and getting paid, my whole family called me a slut/whore because of my breasts. I did not wear revealing clothing and was very conscious. No person should be made to feel less for their looks in any way, shape or form regardless of their size or facial features. Many times I was threatened also if I was fat, if I was thin, why can't you get those things out of the way. We're expected to act the way we are treated because many have a preconceived nothing that women with large breasts are easy and sleep around. What are we supposed to do, cut them off?

Unfortunately, the fashions, at this time, have not helped matters at all. It is presumed that all women wear the same type of clothing and have a mentality of ready to serve for sexual reasons.

I am not trying to offend anyone, just give an opinion.

November 19 2010 at 6:10 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
TommyA

Yeah right! She has more manly features than feminine features! Cut ne a break!

November 19 2010 at 2:47 AM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply

Search Articles

Top Companies Hiring

Week of Oct 26 - Nov 2
View All

Featured Writers

Meet the team

Picks From the Web