Letterman's producer calls workplace fair for employees

Rob Burnett, executive producer of “Late Show with David Letterman,” is defending the program’s treatment of women after the National Organization for Women complained that Letterman’s relationship with female staffers created a “toxic environment.”

In a letter of response to NOW, released today by the organization, Burnett said that the show has long taken seriously the issue of respect for women in the workplace. “As an employee of David Letterman’s since 1985, I have personally found the work environment on his shows to be fair, professional and entirely merit-based at all times,” he wrote on Thursday.

Burnett said that 58% of the “Late Show” staff are women, including three of the show’s four executive producers during the last nine years. He added that the program’s human resources department contacted each member of the “Late Show” staff to determine that they did not feel harassed, noting that Letterman has never had a complaint filed against him.

Earlier this month, NOW President Terry O’Neill sent letters to Burnett -- who is also president of Letterman’s production company, Worldwide Pants -- and CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves, requesting a meeting to discuss the work environment for their female employees. “When a powerful boss like Mr. Letterman has sex with his subordinates it infects the work culture with uncertainty, gossip, and in some cases, hostility,” she wrote.

NOW said that it has not received a response from Moonves.

-- Matea Gold

Comments

[lanita fambro]

Did NOW not care when a MARRIED Les Moonves dated his subordinate Julie Chen on the sly? That seems a LOT more significant... But now that they are married, finally, it's okay? but not okay for Dave, who was single for 40 years? Get a grip, NOW. Butt out.

[Hopskotch]

'“When a powerful boss like Mr. Letterman has sex with his subordinates it infects the work culture with uncertainty, gossip, and in some cases, hostility,” [O'Neill] wrote.'

I am not sure how O'Neill could know this absolutely, assuming she has never worked on the show. Every situation is different. I've worked in an office or two where sleezy bosses made everyone uncomfortable. But I've been in many more where, if relationships developed between two people, they developed consensually between those two people and were handled in a way that didn't make others uncomfortable. From everything I've read, Letterman seems to have kept his relationships in the second category.

Unfortunately, the sleezy boss exception has given rise to repressive workplace rules and expectations. I've worked in places that, as a result, developed such repressive environments that they were dysfunctional.

Human discretion and judgment are difficult things to write HR policy around. But we should stop letting the tail wag the dog; let the kind of workplace we'd find comfortable dictate policy, not the other way around. Besides - isn't there something vaguely 1984-is about having your job police who you can and can't have a relationship with?

[nozebetter]

"58% of the 'Late Show' staff are women"

The better to chose from! It seems Mr Letterman has developed a little harem rather than a working staff. Do these young girls know up front what their duties, er I mean assignments will be?

[bob-b]

hollywood without sex? how will all the women get their jobs?

[bob-b]

scratch that last one: Showbusiness without sex? How will all the women get their jobs?

[Daniel]

Toxic workplace? I'm breakin' a rib, here! That's hilarious.

Hopskotch | October 20, 2009 at 04:22 PM, has it dead on. The sleezy boss should be the target every time. This whole thing is all about trying to nail a big name. Nothing more. Since when is having a relationship with a co-worker anybody else's business? Isn't the story about an attempt to blackmail?

lanita fambro | October 20, 2009 at 03:03 PM, has the best advice: "Butt out."

[Phil]

NOW knows nothing of the work envrionment anywhere, except for within NOW. Moonves, CBS, Burnett and Letterman would be right to refuse O'Neill's request for a meeting. She has no business butting her nose in their organizations. Further, in pressured workplaces like TV entertainment production, lust and romance will happen. This is human and in no way does its occurance between fully consenting partners -- married to others or not -- preclude operation of a safe and fair workplace. Sex and work are hand-in-glove and forevermore shall it continue, regardless of NOW's politics of denial and persecution. Ignore these dessicated prunes and turn your attention to real problems.

[Greg]

The only thing more annoying than NOW's unnecessary butting in to a private matter is another one of Gloria Allred's "hey look at me, I have no business here but let me stick my nose where it doesn't belong in the interest of endless self promotion" letters. Both of them need to get a life and move along.

[julie Runco]

A NOW member, I see the difference between Letterman's situation and sleazy bosses who exchange raise or bonuses for sexual favors and his doesn't come close.

Some checking first into the work place atmosphere and if there were any history of complaints should have gone on before letters were written and sent to anybody including the public. This now makes NOW look like it's seeking publicity then being professional.

Look toward warranted complaints and helping cases were there is a fire.

Terry O'Neill you made noise and falsely, wait and wait you do not deserve a answer.

[Stella]

NOW must need publicity. Going after letterman is a lost cause unless there are charges against him.
Does NOW know that Letterman blackmailer had sex with co workers himself??

[Dan Grantt]

It's not a morality issue here. It's s sexual harassment issue. When a person in a position of power over another engages in anything other than professional conduct, it is demeaning, unethical and often illegal.

Most victims don’t speak up because of this type of rallying for the stud in question. People who speak up are quickly black balled. Why would any women lodge a complaint?

It’s the quickest career killing move she can make.

[Mari]

NOW would seem more important and legitimate if it was vigilant about women's issues in the work place, including interns in the White House, not just picking and choosing who they choose to defend. I don't disagree about there assessment of the David Letterman Show but what are they doing about, ESPN. Jimmy Kimmel, or other industry shows which use interns. NOW needs to show they are for all women all the time, not at their convenience.

[Lin McKay]

Until the public shows their distaste of the work place sexual affairs little will be done. Letterman may skate in his job but I honestly doubt he will do any skating on the homefront. Regina Lasko deserved better and NOT just since they were married. She has been exclusive to Letterman for years and she deserved the same. He has tarnished his family name, lost the trust and respect of his wife and many others, left a disgusting legacy to his young son and compromised his position. Frankly, CBS would rise greatly if they acted on Letterman's sexual conduct in the workplace but with ratings up through the initial process Letterman is likely safe.

It will be interesting to see how far Birkitt falls . . . Letterman can't really afford, at this point, to be overly supportive of his mistress (homewrecker, prostitute if she took gifts, tuition to law school and trips as payment for sex) if he really wants to mend his marriage. Looks like Birkitt took room and board for providing sex to Halderman. Wonder which guy was the favored for his sexual games. I am sure Steve Birkitt and Kathleen Boyle, John Birkitt and Irene Boyle are pleased with their daughter, sister and granddaughter. Who did she think she was kidding? Parents deserve better from their children. Birkitt made her grandmother look foolish stating that Stephanie never had sex with that man. Birkitt's television career is likely over. Whose wife will allow him to hire such a hottie who gives it out in the work place?