'Compassionless': Lawsuit says Bernie Sanders campaign demoted staffer day after cancer surgery
Source: NBC News
July 10, 2020, 6:26 PM EDT / Updated July 10, 2020, 6:35 PM EDT
By Dareh Gregorian
The former California political director for Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign says she was demoted a day after undergoing cancer surgery and forced to quit after the campaign ignored her harassment and discrimination complaints.
In a lawsuit filed Friday in Los Angeles Superior Court, Susie Shannon said it was the Sanders' campaign's "outrageous and compassionless conduct" that "resulted in her forced resignation solely because she had the misfortune of being diagnosed with ovarian cancer that required major surgery to treat the disease."
The campaign then tried to get her to sign a non-disclosure agreement in return for money, the suit says. Shannon's lawyer, Micha Star Liberty, told NBC News the campaign also offered her client two months of health insurance if she signed. Shannon refused.
"It's so disappointing that a political campaign that purported to stand for so much, including access to healthcare and workers' rights, would behave this way," Liberty said.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/compassionless-lawsuit-says-bernie-sanders-campaign-demoted-staffer-day-after-n1233346
= new reply since forum marked as read
"Why is it [universal health care] not part of the Biden platform at this point?" But it is!
Bernie answered that Biden has "moved a whole lot" and now "proposes to lower the eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 60" and lower pharmaceutical costs. BUT THE 2016 PLATFORM WAS MEDICARE AT 55 AND ACA WITH PUBLIC OPTION AND LOWER PHARMA COSTS AND MORE.
the biggest friend to labor, proudly proclaiming itself the first to have it's staff organize into a union? Are you saying that the employer was justified in harrassing and demoting her for choosing to return to work for whatever reason, having a paycheck to pay the rent being among them?
What reaction do you think Sanders would have had about any other candidate campaign that faced allegations of ignoring harassment and discrimination complaints?
Why do you think that tried to make her sign an NDA, if indeed they thought how they handled this was all well and good?
Perhaps you missed this in the OP, or you wouldn't say that she felt she needed to rush back to work because she was "terrified" that "she would lose her health care" - she wasn't being told that she was losing her health care, but that she was being demoted.
The day after the surgery, the suit says, Shannon got a phone call in her hospital room from Rafael Navar, the campaign's state director, telling her she was being demoted.
Navar bluntly stated that he had no confidence in her ability to do her job given her cancer and surgery and that he was bringing in someone else to do her job," the suit says.
Zipped right past that question about the NDA. I don't blame you... that's gotta be awkward.
What's the old saying?
"How can I miss you if you don't go away?"
Perhaps it's for the best. You seem to be very upset about what's being reporting on in the OP, to the point of replying with several non-sequiturs.
Rafel Navar? The person who not only demoted her from her position as California Campaign chair, but got the position when she was taken out?
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rafael-n%C3%A1var-9a2b214
Last I heard this is Democratic Underground, and Biden is the Democratic candidate for POTUS.
That seems to get under your skin.
There are other sites where Biden bashing is de rigeur, and you may be more comfortable there.
(for some people)
This was interesting:
A spokesman for the Sanders campaign, Mike Casca, said, "We've not received this lawsuit and we don't comment on litigation."
This was interesting too. It makes me wonder why they were so concerned about secrecy... what are they hiding?
The campaign then tried to get her to sign a non-disclosure agreement in return for money, the suit says. Shannon's lawyer, Micha Star Liberty, told NBC News the campaign also offered her client two months of health insurance if she signed. Shannon refused.
BTW, Arturo Carmona denied all allegations as well, despite being moved to another position by HR after harassment reports.
Perhaps you weren't around to see the glee on the part of some here on DU when it was revealed after the election that a Clinton staffer was accused of harassment during her campaign.
with Biden's chances? Is reporting on any former Democratic candidates in a way that doesn't flatter them also a danger to Biden's chances?
Do you think that there are Sanders voters who will refuse to vote for a Democrat if they think that Sanders is being criticized at all?
Are you saying you think that unless this woman is soundly discredited by the Party, or at least ignored, that some voters will retaliate by not voting for Biden?
from the reporting of a harrasment claim in a campaign, and if it's Senator Sanders, then apparently it's a "hit piece."
Why do you tie reporting about harrasement claims to "Democrats in dissarray" and how does this reporting harm Joe Biden's chances, or puts us in the "clutches of Trumpism?"
If Senator Sanders seeks the spotlight of national stage and the media, especially claiming leadership on labor issues, then people should not be offended when the spotlight also reveals something that an NDA tried to keep quiet.
There cannot be one standard for Sanders own employees concerning workers rights or or health policy and another for everyone else to be held to. That is what "Trumpism" claims for Trump, and we're above that.
Right?
After all, what would Sanders say about these allegations being made against any other candidate?
The facts do not back up your statement and Bernie only topped out at about 35%. That isn't winning.
Why wouldn't universal healthcare be a winning issue? Seriously, let's put aside any pointless animus one may feel towards Bernie or whoever, and let's just look at what you're now arguing. Universal healthcare should be right up there, along with things like an end to racial inequality, a living wage, and protecting democracy (sorry, that's my long-distance idea of what's important in the US right now). Don't let not liking any politician, whoever they may be is, let people lose sight of what's really important...
Having said that, there's one issue that overrides all others right now, and that's to get rid of Trump. Which is why I don't care whether Biden supports universal healthcare or not. I'm kind of suspecting he may anyway....
Let me tell you a joke I saw on the Guardian yesterday. It made me chuckle:
Q - What's bordering on stupidity?
A - Mexico and Canada!
If the idea of universal healthcare fails at the ballot box among Democrats, then I fail to see where it is going to catch on among conservatives. We can jump and shout about healthcare until high noon, but until proof is provided that a new healthcare system can be constructed that is more cost-efficient than the current system, doesn't ration healthcare, and that minimizes government's role in healthcare, then the idea of universal healthcare is beyond the "sell by" date for most voters.
As a Republican coworker once told me, the Democrats may have good intentions with their plans but the end results don't always jibe with those intentions. Americans by their very nature do not trust government--Democrats don't trust Republicans when they are in charge and vice versa. Democrats can't agree among themselves when two or three options are presented; meanwhile, Republicans don't present any options whatsoever and aren't even willing to accept the status quo as evidenced by the repeated attempts to nullify the Affordable Care Act.
Canada's your next-door neighbour, so there's the familiarity factor. The US has a massive ball of yarn-tangles to be dealt with when it comes to health insurance that other countries like mine haven't had to deal with because we've had universal health care from the start (at least during my lifetime!). And as you mentioned, there's the distrust of government thing happening in the US. I personally don't get it. I don't trust authority, but I do trust that my government will do the right thing by us in a crisis (which it surprisingly did for the pandemic). Universal healthcare is an issue for 2024, imo. Get Trump out and then the air may clear enough for it to be dealt with 
That took over 15 years, then a very liberal government was elected in 1968, and added a federal layer.
Single payer was voted down in Colorado and didn't even make it to the ballot in CA and VT, so no, we won't be doing it the way Canada did. It helps to know some history.
Also, Canada didn't start in 2020, with a very entrenched system, so I think that "copy and paste" would take a lot longer than you might think.
It seems simple, but it's not.
I spotted it posted in the comments section and the person who posted it said it was an old one. I just hadn't seen it before. It's sooo good, though. I had a self-righteous moment of 'People don't make jokes like that about Australia!" when I read it
I'd really like to believe that even when an employee's rights don't stretch to them being protected and safe in a job when they're suffering something horrible like cancer, their employer would do whatever's reasonably possible to help them get through a really difficult period.
But the US does need universal healthcare. That way even if a shit employer does the wrong thing, it's not the end of the world for the employee when it comes to getting medical treatment
It has been chipped away at by the GOP, but Democrats were swept into office in 2018 on the promise of fixing it and getting it back on track to full implementation.
Perhaps you are unclear on the defintion of Universal Health Care?
Universal healthcare (also called universal health coverage, universal coverage, or universal care) is a health care system in which all residents of a particular country or region are assured access to health care.
Single payer is one way that countries achieve UHC, albeit a rare one. Most are a hybrid of payers and partnerships with state, local and private entities to deliver care.
Single payer/Medicare for All is to Universal Health Care as toy poodle is to canine. One can acquire a canine without it being a toy poodle.
I hope that clears things up for you!
Last edited Sat Jul 18, 2020, 11:23 AM - Edit history (1)
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/universal-health-coverage-(uhc)
Since you needed to look up what's in the Democratic platform to find out what we are doing, here is some information on the ACA:
The ACA was scheduled to expand further over the next decade, as HRC was discussing during the 2016 general election (expanding the age to buy into Medicare down to age 55 and insuring all children up to age 18, for instance). The GOP has chipped away at it, and it needs to be restored and put back on track. There is no "resting on the laurels" of anything, so focusing on getting the ACA back to where it needs to be is indeed bringing the US in line with the healthcare systems of other countries.
Perhaps you aren't aware that most other countries do not use single payer as UHC, but different customized and often tweaked and updated hybrid payer and public/private partnership programs, more like the ACA than what Canada and the UK have. For instance Australia has a public/private partnership to attain UHC. (even then, it doesn't cover everything. )
Here is some information on that:
https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/02/21/universal-health-care
I also don't know if you're aware that the SCOTUS here in the states has become more conservative. If the 2010 SCOTUS ruled that states did not have to participate in Medicaid eligibility expansion to childless adults and those who are making minimum wage, there is very little chance that the SCOTUS of 2021 is going to rule that states must participate in a Medicare expansion to the entire population.
The US is very different from other countries in many ways. Maybe you haven't heard that simply wearing masks as a public health protection measure has been demonized as a political statement against Trump.
I hope this gives you some understanding of how much more complicated the situation here in the US is compared to other countries, and why the solutions to the US situation are going to be far less simple than one might assume.
To wit:
Universal healthcare is a system where every citizen resident has access to medical treatment that won't leave them with out-of-pocket expenses. My understanding is that ACA gave every US citizen access to private health insurance policies, which is a bit of a different thing. What my country gives is basic medical care for all citizens or permanent residents. There's going to be things that lie outside that, like drugs that haven't been yet been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, treatments that aren't available in Australia etc. But for most people like me, who break our legs or have a stroke or get Covid, our system will fix us up and send us home and not charge us a cent.
I'm assuming that ACA will expand further under Biden once he's cleaned up the almighty fucked up mess left behind by Trump, and ACA will probably be the path for the US to get what we have in other countries. I hope that happens, and that health insurance is uncoupled from employment (my niece was WTF??? when she got a job with Costco when they opened here and the American head honcos offered everyone health insurance).
Anyway, don't get me wrong. I totally get how different it is in the US, and how what seems simple to me, simply isn't. An example (and I'm embarrassed now to admit it) is that I blamed Obama for not enacting enough change, and didn't realise till far too late that the Republicans controlled the Senate and did their best to destroy what he tried to enact...
My head honestly hurts when I see things about wearing masks in the US. What has happened to common-sense??? Though with a massive outbreak in Melbourne and state borders closed, a Melbourne based conspiracy theorist managed to get past the roadblocks and get to Canberra to attend some protest where people without masks complain about wearing a mask in a city where only the very vulnerable wear masks anyway. After thinking up some Game of Thrones-style punishments (being refused bail just wasn't enough for me given I have elderly parents and a child who's high risk. My rage levels are pretty high after a three-month lockdown), I decided deporting the wanker to his soul mates in the US was the best option. Unfortunately, no-one listens to me 
I don't know if anything like this has happened in the US yet, but it's happened in Melbourne. Words cant describe how disgusted I am with whoever did this...
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/coronavirus-melbourne-fake-playground-sign-says-children-can-use-equipment/news-story/da826fa849dc6ba1f18e2dc14e4d4d84
Stay safe (assuming yr in the US)
No, that is not the definition of UHC, as I pointed out before. That's a common misconception, and unfortunately, many people refuse to believe it when corrected. Since you rejected the WHO definition, here are some dollar amounts of out of pocket expenses in countries that you agree have UHC:
....................................
We found that out-of-pocket costs reported by Canadian respondents were comparable to those in Australia, greater than those in the UK and New Zealand, and much less than those in the US.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5595213/
Health care funding will never be completely uncoupled from employers, even if it's available separately from employers, as all countries with UHC have some form of cost sharing and adminstration with employers.
No employer can demote or fire someone BECAUSE they have cancer, but an employer can demote or fire someone DESPITE them having cancer. As long as cancer (or any other illness) isn't the reason for someone being sacked, then of course an employer has a right to performance manage their staff.
Also, healthcare shouldn't be linked to employment. It isn't here in Australia, and we have universal healthcare where I know that if I were to get cancer (or COVID-19), I'm not going to have to sell the soul of my oldest child to be able to pay hefty hospital bills. Medicare covers it all and it doesn't matter if I'm employed or not. Why is it so difficult for the US to do what most other countries have done? I guess for the same reason that COVID-19 is out of control in the US, but has been suppressed relatively successfully in many other countries
And if she was hired as the California Political Director for the Sanders Campaign, what does that say about the vetting process for upper level staffers?
Last edited Sun Jul 12, 2020, 12:53 PM - Edit history (1)
That makes no sense at all.
All I'm trying to say is this: It's not the legitimate news story that's divisive... instead, it's ugly accusations and rude name-calling like that (ie: "sore winners'') that's actually divisive. Why would you say such a thing? What good purpose does it serve?
smh
Shannon said she was "devastated" and reached out to campaign adviser Chuck Rocha, Navar's supervisor. He "casually responded that he supported Navar in whatever decision he decided to make," the suit says. It does not name Rocha as a defendant.
issues, again and again. And unhappy employees are female far too often for that to be just coincidence.
If I were to guess, I'd assume he was hiring too many of his antagonistic populist bro types for upper management. The aggressive ones whose passion was for attacking Democrats? That's because, turns out, aggressive antagonistic populists tend to be at least somewhat socially conservative and misogynistic. And often very. (Of course.)
Whatever the reason, Sanders could long ago have put an end to his chronic labor problems and embarrassing national coverage of them by firing managers whose behavior contradicted his rhetoric. Period.
In fact, he could have replaced them with managers from those who were instead drawn by his idealistic socialist rhetoric. But they presumably would have wanted to provide fair, living, equal wages and benefits to everyone, including low-level employees, and we should assume that Sanders doesn't. He talks of a better world but operates in this one, where cutting labor costs leaves more money for future enterprises.
