Manager says Citibank fired her for being too hot

spagirl said on January 9, 2011 at 11:17 AM

Really? This is still here? I'm so over yesterdays news. KIRO here I come! KING 5 used to have the latest news....and it was far more interesting that everyone elses. This has been here for months and is a waste of my time and cyberspace news. See ya!

anonymoususer said on January 8, 2011 at 6:57 PM

OLD STORY --- why is this being resurrected - nothing new to report???

tarzandaz said on January 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM

sorry but she isnt hot.. kinda almost looks like a man with a sex change imho

spagirl said on December 31, 2010 at 1:10 PM

You've had this on here at least one a for the past several months. Is there a reason why? Do you think we don't notice this stuff?

gizmo1 said on December 30, 2010 at 1:29 PM

I feel the same way now I did when I first read this. First...who cares? Second...get over yourself.

charleylechein said on December 30, 2010 at 11:23 AM

The title of the headline is misleading, and its beren written by someone who thinks she is hot. There is a difference between wamr and hot, as there is a difference between who played the character of WKRP. It wasnt Farah, Farch played as one of the original CHARLY'S ANGELS. Guess I waw paying mnore attention to the BOOB TUBE that others. Im waiting for banks to open up branches that look more like strip clubs, where the tellers greet you with a sultry dance routine as you are asked how they can help you today. Seriously, Im not. Banks all want you to give them money, I dont want banks to charge me for allowing my money to remain domant for at least 30 days or less. Usually less. Her lawyer should take a picture of her wearing what she interviewd with to get the job, if thats it, case dismissed.

alwaysalisha said on December 30, 2010 at 5:45 AM

In my opinion her wardrobe is completly appropriate for her line of work. I agree that she does have a very nice figure, and yes certain clothes may emphasize that fact. So as long as her outfits aren't inappropriate, they should not offend. Perhaps make other female co-workers a bit envious, but last time I checked that isn't breaking any laws. As far as her attractivness goes, I would say that she is pretty. Definatley not a hyena or anything repulsing. But she is also NOT drop dead gorgous either. She seems to be average to me. Nothing to gawk over. But that's just me and men tend to have a different opinion, usually if she's "hot" body wise, to men she is overall. So I would think all the more reason to keep her around if they really are focused on her looks so much. She may just have to come to terms with that she may actually have poor preformance. Most likely because she is depending to much on looks. It is all for attention, the pix scream look at me! Conceited much?

funkyou said on September 6, 2010 at 8:19 PM

She is a very attractive woman, and in my opinion thats reason to keep her not fire her! gives male workers and customers something to look at and brighten their day and even reason for some to do more bank business.

sslaven said on August 23, 2010 at 12:26 PM

This is OLD news - a month or so. Who cares. Give us something more noteworthy.

thesnowqueen said on August 15, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Why is this STILL on here? It was not interesting in the first place.

jannfann1 said on August 11, 2010 at 9:59 AM

JuneB; Sorry to be a noodge-- Loni Anderson on WKRP not Farrah Fawcett. But I absolutely agree with you!! I hope Citibank has documentation of "poor performance." Unfortunately it will probably consist of the dozens of tiny infractions we all commit everyday. Like posting on here instead of working! : )

cosmaki said on August 1, 2010 at 1:59 PM

johnnyjagged loved your comment! Good one! Although I think that this story if nothing more could be a reminder to many of us that Americans have real difficulty considering the possibility that maybe it was their performance, maybe they just didn't cut the mustard! Many of us nowadays have to blame somebody else for what goes wrong in their lives, unable to be honest with themselves and take a good look in the mirror. Well in this case maybe thats all she did!

liberterius said on July 11, 2010 at 12:05 PM

@thesnowaueen, umm it's still on here becasue she's an attractive woman, we all like attractive women. At least she takes care of herself unlike most American business women who are addicted to Krispy Kreme.

luna1sierra said on July 10, 2010 at 2:09 PM

its not the ladies clothes,looks, or intelligence that got her fired...its that she wouldn't "date" one of her bosses.....yes,this still happens

thesnowqueen said on July 10, 2010 at 10:52 AM

Why is this still on here??????????????????/

liberterius said on July 9, 2010 at 1:46 PM

I find nothing wrong with her manner of dress whatsoever. God forbid she's actually attractive and dresses well. However this lawsuit stinks, and I'm very dubious as to why she thinks this got her fired. She's not all that good looking.

catzandogz said on July 5, 2010 at 10:19 AM

what a joke.

slidddllllllll said on June 30, 2010 at 8:40 AM

I would certainly hope, that this woman, is unemployed for a long time; she needs to learn a lesson on business behavior!!!!! She was enhanced, so what! I work for a major corporation, YOU cannot dress like this PERIOD! What are you, NEW? Absolutely ridiculous!

smcasey108482787 said on June 29, 2010 at 12:10 PM

So her lawyer is taking these photos to help her case...but looking at these photos, is this an effin law suit or demo pics for a modeling career??? Seriously..."oh, I was being tagged for sexual harrassment, but oh...I'm going to pose provocitively and model in these photos"...omg...

sibyl69 said on June 23, 2010 at 9:09 PM

I want this woman's lawyer. Representing myself has gone badly indeed. I was fired from government service as a favor to my ex-husband. If the lady or her lawyer are reading this, please contact me at Sibylhalfelven69@yahoo.com

juneb said on June 21, 2010 at 12:12 PM

This is reminiscent of the Third Rock from the Sun episode where the younger female star felt that she was sexually harssing her co-workers because the policy said if she made someone "uncomfortable" then she was guilty--and those around her were distracted by her good looks, confessing to having trouble concentrating. It was intended to be a commentary on the absurdity of nailing down what is or is not harassment, but here is the same situation in real life. Of course, I can also recall Farrah Fawcet on WKRP who really did not know how to do any work but was kept for her good looks, so maybe being fired for good looks is progress, somehow???

smithrock said on June 21, 2010 at 10:34 AM

She can sleep with me if she wants to.

tuomoks said on June 19, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Old news but that's how life is now. After 40 years working in many countries I definitely can believe this. It actually wasn't this bad before, yes, gender and whatever problems were there but you were also allowed to fight it. Today - no way, the manager / corporate is always right? What can you do - the public, courts, etc are for corporate, not for individuals anymore? Money making is more important than any one person - vote more for that, you get what you ask!

johnnyjagged said on June 11, 2010 at 10:46 AM

You're so vain....you probably think this song is about you.......

blankey said on June 10, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Could it be they fired her for admiring herself in the mirror all day instead of actually waiting on customers? She probably spent the whole day "researching rich men's bank accounts instead of actually doing her work. She's got that "gold digger - pay lots of attention to me" look about her. It's obvious she wants a big payout and lots of attention. This is her way of getting her 15 minutes of fame. She's on every tv show talking about how beautiful and sexy she is. I feel sorry for the chump who has to listen to her brag about her beauty 24 hours a day and spend his whole paycheck on her. The CEO's of Citibank have better things to do than to pay attention to her. They have a company to run. Bimbo, be gone.

sibyl69 said on June 10, 2010 at 5:28 PM

It's possible, all right. I just had a similar experience. They make up reasons to get rid of people. I was just booted out the door as a favor to my ex-husband, and the fat ladies who did it got a fine promotion. This is how government really works.

phearis said on June 8, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Maybe .... just maybe ..... she was fired because she was posing for photos at work, when she should've been ... working. just a thought.

cathykombol06311 said on June 7, 2010 at 6:32 PM

who cares about the firing ? tell citigroup to turn a better profit . regardless of what anyone looks like . details details . bank accountiblity ---a better story by far .

zadidoll said on June 6, 2010 at 12:45 PM

I can believe she was fired for being attractive. At my last job I was fired for being TOO ORGANIZED! My boss literally said, "I'm afraid I have to let you go, you're just too organized for me". Translation of both situations - "we're broke and need an excuse to get rid of you."

earthwarden said on June 5, 2010 at 11:51 AM

She only has her word about the reason she was fired, she gave no evidence about her job performance ( evals, production numbers, letters of appreciation ect...). If your are going to make a claim like that, you had better have all your ducks in a row. Yes she does look good, but the pictures seem to be more for publicity than what she was supposed to be doing at work. Maybe instead of "modeling" poses she actually had real photos of her at work.

jmd005 said on June 5, 2010 at 7:45 AM

I think photo number 5 shows an excellent example of why she was let go. Not much going on behind her eyes.

anonymoususer said on June 4, 2010 at 5:43 PM

She was more likely fired for having an ego problem. Narcissists like this always think too much of themselves.

bellevuetom said on June 4, 2010 at 3:54 PM

I think all the plastic and other store bought items....and I am not talking about her clothing, is warping her brain. She just wants attention....and then maybe an invitation from Playboy to make make her happy. Someone needs a time-out. To the attorney......come on!!!!!!!why are you wasting your time.

av8nbill said on June 4, 2010 at 3:00 PM

It's far more likely she was HIRED for her looks than FIRED for her looks. Methinks it had more to do with attitude...

ksquared said on June 4, 2010 at 12:22 PM

This story is a waste of space and her lawsuit is frivalous!

lsmith5870400119 said on June 4, 2010 at 8:08 AM

Maybe the only reason she got the job was, in her opinion, being hot.. She probably didn't complain then. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and only skin deep, but ugly goes all the through.

papabill said on June 3, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Years ago we would refer to this in the Insurance Industry as an Attractive Nuisance, looks to me more like an Attractive Distraction. I would guess that is was not the young lady not getting her work done, but probably more like her male counter-parts that were not performing up to par. Just one elderly gentleman’s opinion - I still remember when I was young. Nice to know that there are still ladies out there that take pride in their appearance. Certainly not cause for dismissal.

arcticfireguy said on June 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM

... and looking at her pictures, she is not near as HOT as she thinks she is. Did you see that her Attorney took these pictures of her being HOT. I bet he is not being paid in "GUM". :)

arcticfireguy said on June 3, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Just trying to win the "Legal LOTTO". Theres more than one way to be a Gold Digger. :)

ponderer said on June 3, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Citibank is going to have to really cough up documentation and history on her work performance if they are going have any weight for their firing of her. Would I find it difficult working around someone that looks that great...you betcha; but that is my problem and not hers.

scott_bellevue said on June 3, 2010 at 1:48 PM

Oh come on. Nobody fires women for being too "hot". Not even nerds do that.

trucker45 said on June 3, 2010 at 12:48 PM

Well she is attractive but there is a gal that hot at a local branch of the credit union. I would also say she had better have a great performance record to backup the fired for being too hot cause.

marty3001 said on June 3, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Think...."Bond....James Bond"............she could get work as one of the James Bond ladies. If she posed like that at work (they are implying these are work wardrobes, work "poses"), then she was hot, distracting and unprofessional. However, as a co-worker, I don't think I would complain. Probably some other female employees who are "heavier" and envious of her looks. Maybe her boss was just such a female. Anyway, with her looks and current stab at "15 minutes of fame", she won't be unemployed for long, if at all now. Luck attorney too.......hope he is a guy.........who likes females........great client!!!

chesterfield said on June 3, 2010 at 10:16 AM

and she wears 6 inch heels why? looks like photo op to me, hope she can make more sense than palin

nonsense said on June 3, 2010 at 9:38 AM

She's beautiful, but so are a lot of other professional women who aren't being fired. Walk down the streets of any major city during the week and you'll see dozens of women with comparable looks in comparable clothes. I sincerely doubt she was fired for her appearance.

newlogin86 said on June 3, 2010 at 8:09 AM

If you read the real article, NOWHERE does she say "I am too hot for my job", "They fired me for being to HOT!" Its glorified journalism to grab headlines and chalk her up to being some type of snob. Now was she an idiot to pose for the lingerie shots in the same "Voice" magazine? Yes!

red_rocker said on June 3, 2010 at 7:45 AM

I walked up to the teller, I gave her the letter She gave me the loot with puckered up lips And a wink that I found cute, and I said, "baby, baby, baby" (Is this some Kharmic-Chi love thing happening here baby or what.) Fun Lovin' Criminals, "Scooby Snacks"

red_rocker said on June 3, 2010 at 7:43 AM

Well, you're only looking at her from the side, and it's only one photograph. Maybe she has a point!

snapdragons said on June 3, 2010 at 7:00 AM

Well, from the way I see it, she needs to document her job performance reviews FIRST. Then concentrate on her perception of what a true businesswoman SHOULD dress like. She IS indeed very pretty- but attire such as hers, and the poses she strikes in some of those provocative "businesslike" photos, are indeed inappropriate for the workplace. Wish that I had a figure like that! But, NOT AT WORK.

techwillfail said on June 3, 2010 at 1:51 AM

Amateur photos and bad clothes, meh - this makes her seem more self absorbed and distracted than hot and distracting.

plutonomics said on June 2, 2010 at 10:18 PM

I'd hit it...

genagee said on June 2, 2010 at 10:12 PM

Smells like an attention wh*re looking for her 15 mins of fame. She is pretty but come on???

freemonttroll said on June 2, 2010 at 9:26 PM

I'd make a deposit!

romana said on June 2, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Obviously, the CEO-types have too much free time. Instead of bothering a nice-looking woman, they should be doing their jobs. How much client money have they squandered in the meantime? I do not know how competent this woman is, but she is probably at least equal to her male coworkers, and she has good choice in clothes. This is just more of the old game "Blame the Victim."

collegeguy said on June 2, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Lame trolls like Anonuser need to get a clue and stop blaming Seattle for this stuff. NY city is the hot bed for egotistical narcicists. However, she isn't bad looking at all but her being good looking doesn't present actual evidence that her looks had anything to do with it.

marcia1970 said on June 2, 2010 at 7:31 PM

1st off I do believe they fired her for the right reasons. I think this individual is probably trying to look for a way to get money due to the hard economy. She is pretty but she is not breath taking beautiful, I think she needs to reconsider her law suit because she is going to find that its going to cost her a grip in lawers fees and she is going to lose. One more thing I would like to add is sorry to say honey but your pics just are not good enough for modeling, I see with all the photos you are trying to get work. You are making your case harder on you by your poses any arbitrator will see that you are trying to hard. I certainly hope you have enough evidence to back you up otherwise its going to be real embarrasing for you when the arbitrator decides on Citibank.

bruce05 said on June 2, 2010 at 6:40 PM

i hope she wins to be honest i dont see where theres any skin being shown or thing that indicates it i am wondering if maybe she is a lot better looking then her boss is and theres some jelousy going on here ? also i dont see where looks make a differance in the job performance as long as she can do the job ? who cares how good or bad looking she is i will offer this advice if she is fired for her looks ? then let her take herself and her looks and get another job she seems to be betetr then that

clear2copy said on June 2, 2010 at 6:11 PM

I'd trow

thesnowqueen said on June 2, 2010 at 5:34 PM

She's okay, but not as big of a bag of chips that she thinks she is.......

tdooley323929368 said on June 2, 2010 at 4:56 PM

Most of your comments are assuming a lot! And you know what happens when you assume something... I didn't read anything that sounded egotistical. She mentioned her "figure", not her Goddess like beauty. For all we know, she could be telling the truth...or not.

mistertee said on June 2, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Is she kidding? I've seen better "Broads" at a plumber’s convention.

anonymoususer said on June 2, 2010 at 4:51 PM

She's a transplanted seattle narcissist - delusions of grandeur. ---- look up traits of narcissism

1beachperson said on June 2, 2010 at 3:12 PM

WOW - what an ego. Can't admin she just couldn't do the job, so blame it on her "hottness". Too full of herself to actually work! And, there are appropriate standards of dress, especially in banks. Banks I've worked in even had dress codes, so if she wasn't following those AND had poor job performance, well, bye bye loser!

imtinac said on June 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Hope they documented the job performance issues.

kennovak67184564 said on June 2, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Overall, she may have been a 10 at Citibank but on the outside she's a 7(just above average). I guess the bosses at Citibank don't get out much these days....

dougp said on June 2, 2010 at 1:49 PM

that wasnt there earlier.

gravel said on June 2, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Awfully full of herself... Granted, sexual harassment is sexual harassment, but I think this woman's motives are a little more transparent than that.

natedoggua said on June 2, 2010 at 12:33 PM

There's a big, bold link at the bottom of the text to a 20 picture gallery. Obviously you're not one that reads *insert nudey mag here* for the articles. :)

dougp said on June 2, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Really? Lets post a big sign of CitiBank rather than this "MILF". Thanks for nothing!