The partnership between Shanti Stanton and Steve Elmendorf, which began in Washington, is a well-known tale. Stanton, a recent college graduate, joined Elmendorf’s team on Capitol Hill in 1995, where he served as her boss and mentor. When Elmendorf started his own lobbying firm in 2007, Stanton was one of his first hires and remained with him for over 15 years.
However, their working relationship came to a sudden end last year when Stanton and another female executive were dismissed from the firm, Subject Matter, under the guise of cost-cutting. Stanton and her colleague, Audrey Chang, were planning to sue the firm for gender discrimination and a hostile work environment.
Stanton spoke out about the discrimination and toxic culture at Subject Matter, where women were not treated as equals despite their success in the firm. The situation led to a settlement between the women and the firm, but it shed light on the challenges faced by female executives in the male-dominated world of Washington lobbying.
Despite the settlement, the allegations against Subject Matter raised concerns about the treatment of women in the workplace. Many former employees reported experiencing sexist behavior, such as being belittled by male bosses or having their ideas dismissed. CEO Nicole Cornish defended the firm, stating that it has a strong female leadership team and promotes women within the organization.
The firm, now known as Avoq, has continued to grow and expand its services, attracting major clients in the lobbying and PR industry. However, the controversy surrounding its treatment of women has brought attention to the need for a more inclusive and respectful workplace culture. The data collected by her and the head of the digital team, Hastie Afkhami, did not align with the story he had presented to the client. Despite efforts to adjust the research to meet Frick’s expectations, Plotkin revealed that Frick publicly criticized Afkhami in front of the client, disputing the accuracy of the data. Plotkin, who had worked closely with Afkhami, believed this incident marked a breaking point in their relationship as Afkhami left the company shortly after. The experience left Plotkin feeling disillusioned with Paul and the workplace environment.
Plotkin also observed a pattern where female account managers were often reprimanded by Frick, while men in senior positions were praised and given more credibility even when their efforts did not match those of their female counterparts. The discriminatory treatment towards women at the firm was a common theme, with many former employees highlighting the disparity in opportunities for advancement and the unequal distribution of workload.
The firm’s culture assessment revealed that only 9 percent of women considered themselves promoters of the company, with a significant portion expressing negative sentiments. Complaints from former employees predominantly focused on the communications side of the firm, led by Frick and Dan Sallick. The unequal treatment of men and women, especially in terms of second chances and career progression, was a recurring issue raised by multiple sources.
Several former employees recounted instances of female colleagues breaking down in tears at the office, reflecting the toxic work environment. One employee even received harsh criticism from Frick during her final review, causing her to leave the room in tears. Another former employee reported receiving intimidating calls from the firm’s legal team after speaking out about her negative experiences.
The draft lawsuit filed by Stanton and Chang alleged that they were unjustly terminated despite being high performers at the firm. Stanton claimed that Elmendorf misled her by promising equity in the new firm after convincing her to sell off her shares during an investment deal. The manipulative tactics used by Elmendorf and the mistreatment of female employees highlighted the toxic and discriminatory culture at Subject Matter.
It was imperative to finalize this deal before Nancy Pelosi ceased to be the Speaker…
Following her signing of the document, Elmendorf repeatedly spoke of her future at the firm, promising to find ways for her to increase her earnings, she claimed.
The atmosphere changed in January 2023, shortly after she had renewed all her client contracts. In March, she was informed in a meeting that she was being let go due to “pressure” from the private equity firm to cut costs.
Despite her positive performance reviews and long tenure, she was the only one terminated from the government affairs side of the firm. Confronting Elmendorf, she expressed her disappointment at the situation, stating that she trusted him and felt betrayed.
According to the draft lawsuit, Elmendorf murmured under his breath that there had been a “draw out clause” in the purchase agreement she signed. Stanton was given a mere nine days’ notice before her departure on March 31.
Chang had a shorter yet significant history at the firm. She joined Subject Matter in 2018 to establish its strategic communications practice and was given the title of senior vice president.
In the draft complaint, she mentioned raising concerns about gender and racial diversity even before being hired, noting the male-dominated leadership at the firm. Chang, who is Asian American, also alleged racially discriminatory behavior at the firm.
Despite not receiving a performance review until three years into her job, she received high praise from her boss, Frick. Her team received multiple awards for their work, including one for a campaign created for the 9/11 Memorial and Museum.
When she requested a title bump to executive vice president in her performance reviews to reflect her contributions, she was denied. Chang believed she was seen as an ally of Stanton and a potential witness to discrimination allegations.
Several former employees were assured job security post-merger with Kivvit but were laid off without warning. The diverse team led by Chang was let go shortly after pointing out a lack of diversity within the firm.
Despite a few positive accounts, the prevailing sentiment among former female employees and some men was negative. Many felt pressured to stay silent about mistreatment in the workplace.
“In this type of work environment, it’s easier to try to avoid the bad actors, look the other way and keep the blinders on, but that is how this mistreatment is allowed to continue,” Chang said before the settlement. “There is tremendous pressure to stay silent. But I also know that it’s not just me, that there are dozens of talented women who have been driven out of Subject Matter.”
Please rewrite this sentence.
Source link
