Complaint: Failure to Respond
Morgan Stanley > Gender Discrimination > Complaint > Complaint and the firm's Failure to Respond
COMPLAINTS OF DISCRIMINATION AND MORGAN STANLEY’S FAILURE TO RESPOND
87. On numerous occasions and in various forums prior to filing her Initial Charge, Ms. Schieffelin complained to senior management at Morgan Stanley about the problems of sexual discrimination and sexual harassment that existed in the Convertible Department and in the Institutional Equity Division.
88. On information and belief, many other female professionals in the Institutional Equity Division also complained repeatedly to senior management at Morgan Stanley about the problems of sexual discrimination and sexual harassment that existed in the Division.
89. At year-end 1995, Ms. Schieffelin, in a formal written “Upward Evaluation," alerted senior management to the problems of sexual discrimination by Mr. Pratt, the Managing Director in charge of the Convertible Department. She wrote that Mr. Pratt “makes the Convertible Department and the Firm by extension an uncomfortable place for women. He does not allow women to be on an equal playing field with men. He views men as ‘aggressive’ and women as ‘snippy’; in tough situations men are ‘frustrated,’ women are ‘too sensitive.’” Ms. Schieffelin noted that Mr. Pratt had “failed to reprimand a senior Principal for a disparaging and possibly illegal comment he made to a pregnant female professional.” She asked senior management to take note of the fact that “both within the firm and among our entire client base [Mr. Pratt] has not one important professional relationship with a woman beyond cute banter.” Ms. Schieffelin further warned that Mr. Pratt “continues to discourage women’s participation in men’s events such as golf outings, football games and ‘boy’s nights out.’”
90. On information and belief, senior management of the firm read this document.
91. On information and belief, no effort was made to address these complaints; the behavior complained of continued unabated.
92. In the spring of 1997, Ms. Schieffelin had a formal conversation with Vikram Pandit, then the head of the IED, in his office to discuss her future career at Morgan Stanley. During the course of the conversation, Ms. Schieffelin repeatedly complained that Mr. Pratt discriminated against women and that this was having a negative impact on her career.
93. Ms. Schieffelin told Mr. Pandit that she would like to be transferred out of the Convertible Department; she asked to be considered for an important opportunity elsewhere in the firm. Mr. Pandit replied that she would definitely be considered for such opportunities in the future and that he would “look into” the complaints that had been registered.
94. On information and belief, Morgan Stanley did not investigate Ms. Schieffelin's complaints of discrimination. The behavior complained of continued unabated.
95. Ms. Schieffelin was never offered any appropriate opportunity outside of the Convertible Department after that meeting.
96. In early 1998, many female professionals complained vociferously to senior management of the IED about the problems of sexual harassment and sexual discrimination in that Division.
97. In mid-1998, Mr. Pandit hosted a series of “women’s dinners” for female officers in the IED to discuss those complaints.
98. On or about July 6, 1998, Ms. Schieffelin and five other female officers attended such a dinner. Over dinner, the women spoke of the various ways in which they had suffered from sexual harassment or sexual discrimination in the IED. Mr. Pandit stated that this was a “cultural thing” -- that this was a “problem [he] had inherited,” which “had a long history” and “could not be changed overnight.” When asked about opportunities for women in the room, he said there was “no real growth in the Equity Division”; and when asked to explain how a woman could get one of the highest paying jobs in the Division (held almost exclusively by men), Mr. Pandit stated, “there’s no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow at Morgan Stanley.”
99. Toward the end of the dinner, one of the women asked how, in light of the admitted long history and substantial magnitude of gender discrimination at Morgan Stanley, the problem could be rectified. Mr. Pandit responded that what the women had experienced was “unfortunate,” but that they “had to look forward,” and that the way the women could help “fix the problem” was to “make things better for the next generation of women at Morgan Stanley.”
100. A female officer who attended the dinner approached Ms. Schieffelin to discuss the dinner and stated her disappointment, saying that it was “obvious [Mr. Pandit] is going to do nothing to help us in this generation.”