May 6, 2013

Louisiana College’s New Donor and Sexual Harassment

Rondall Reynoso

Since I reported last week that Samuel Camp of Pamlab pharmaceutical wealth was the new donor at LC, there have been claims to the contrary. At this point, I am uncertain of the truth. I have had additional sources confirm that Sam Camp is the donor and the information trail seems to lead all the way back  to President Aguillard’s office. On the other hand, two comments on my blog come from people who claim to know Camp and they say he denies he is the donor. So, at this point it is impossible to tell if Camp is denying true claims to continue to protect his anonymity or if the information that, according to multiple sources, came from the President’s office is incorrect.

Either way, the publication of Samuel Camp’s name uncovered some disturbing information. Two different sources sent me a link to a sexual harassment case which was appealed to the Fifth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals. The Appeals Court upheld the juries conclusion that Pamlab was guilty of sexual discrimination toward Carleen Black stating, “We conclude that there was ample evidence to support the jury’s finding of sex discrimination” and “In sum, there was ample evidence by which the jury could conclude that Pamlab had a corporate culture hostile to women, that this discriminatory animus extended to Pamlab’s management, and that Black’s sex was a motivating factor in Pamlab’s decision to terminate her.”  This information is important whether or not Sam Camp is the individual who pledged $10 million to Louisiana College because Camp is a member of the Louisiana College Board of Trustees and a member who voted to exonerate Joe Aguillard from the whistle-blower charges. I think many people will find the text below very bothersome, especially as it relates to a a board member of a Christian College. The date on the legal ruling, which is the second appeal on the case, is July 2011. It is unclear if Sam Camp joined the Louisiana College Board of Trustees in 2008 or 2011. Either way this information should have been considered. If he joined the BoT in 2008 he was renewed in 2011 after this appeal was concluded.

The Court’s decision lays out the following information :

  • When Black was first being trained for her sales position with Pamlab Director of Sales for the Western United States, Tracy Johnson, when role playing  a sales call with Black told her, “I don’t care what you’re selling. I’ll buy it because I can’t keep my eyes off your boobs.”
  • When Black transferred to Texas from Nevada her District Manager Jody Redding was heard telling another male employee that “he wanted to know what it was like to touch [Black’s] breasts.” He was further heard during a company retreat saying, “love the rack,” “[t]hey’re bought and paid for,” and “[t]hey’re not real.” At a national sales meeting Redding propositioned Black in front of other employees by requesting to accompany her back to her hotel room.
  • Stephen Camp, son of Sam Camp, made a “considerable number of sexually inappropriate comments about Black’s body and what it would be like to have sex with her.” He “was heard making comments about Black’s ‘tits’ and saying about Black, ‘Great body, but [I] wouldn’t want to look at her while I’m having sex with her.’” When Black complained to him about her quota (he had told her during the interview that there would be no quota), he told her, “Well, it shouldn’t matter to you, you’re not the breadwinner anyway[,] . . . isn’t your husband the one that makes the money.”
  • This is all indicative of a terrible corporate culture at Sam Camp’s company. However, Camp is also directly tied to inappropriate statements about Black. “Another witness testified that Samuel Camp stated that Black’s body was ‘rocking and hot but her face doesn’t match her body.'” Further, “during her first training session, Samuel Camp asked Black if she planned to have more children and when she said ‘no’ he responded, ‘Well, good, because usually females get hired on, get married, and/or get pregnant and they leave us’; at that same training session, Samuel Camp said that ‘women were a detriment to the company’ and that Black ‘was taking a position from a male.'”

Given this information, it is disturbing that Sam Camp may be a primary benefactor of the theologically conservative Louisiana College. Further, having a Trustee with such legal findings against him and his company is troublesome for an institution that is struggling with it’s own continual allegations of impropriety, especially considering that his vote was a part of vote count that “exonerated” President Joe Aguillard.

 

 

 

Rondall Reynoso


Rondall is an artist, scholar, and speaker. He is currently an Assistant Professor at Lee University in Cleveland, TN. He holds an MFA in Painting and an MS in Art History from Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, NY and is completing a Ph.D. in Art History and Aesthetics from the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, CA.

Related Posts

Midnight Mass’s Allegory: Flourishing in our Fanatical Times

Midnight Mass’s Allegory: Flourishing in our Fanatical Times

A hidden picture? The image of God in humanity

A hidden picture? The image of God in humanity

Reconsidering what it means to be Pro-life in America

Reconsidering what it means to be Pro-life in America

Insiders Until They’re Not

Insiders Until They’re Not
  • Mr. Reynoso , you also may like to know that before Mr. Camp sold his business he also lied about the sale of the company to the employees . There is also a pending lawsuit on that as well. Just keep digging and you will find that there is another sexual discrimination lawsuit that he lost !!!

    • Thank you James. If you have links or information on either of those cases I would be interested in them.

    • google the names, Lee Ingles’ and Dana Shoched law suit. also another one name, Stump vs Samuel Camp

  • Dear Mr. Rondall,
    He who proclaims so loudly his academic honesty and spiritual integrity, must tread cautiously when criticizing Christian brothers and sisters. Are not all one body in Christ? You dear, weaker brother do you not understand how you defile and forsake the name of Christ for your personal aggrandizement and vengeful designs toward those you feel have slighted you?
    Your “great pain is that I believe LC is taking the Lord’s name in vain. To use God’s name in such a way as to bring disrepute upon his character or deeds to irreverently misuse His name.” – Is that not what you are doing in the name of Christ yet doing it without integrity, quality, or discernment?
    You simply disagree with an administration that would rather not have your mediocre instruction, overblown ego, hyper-developed sense of victim-mentality corrupting the academic and spiritual climate on campus. You, brother, are indeed taking the Lord’s name in vain when you claim that others of faith who disagree with you are somehow corrupt. He who is without sin cast the first stone. Oh, Rondall– do you really believe that you are ready to take up your petrified lump of bile and throw it at another Christian brother or sister, while your Savior silently scrawls in the sand the enigmatic runes of forgiveness, grace, mercy and love?

    • Fiona,

      I have not problem with others disagreeing with me. Disagreeing with me and the type of documented corruption we see at Louisiana College and within the LBC are very different. Interestingly, this very post you are replying to is not about disagreement with me, my pour teaching, or my over-blow ego. It is about a case where a trustee and his company were found by a jury to be guilty of sexual harassment and where that judgement was upheld by an appeals court.

      The jury is no longer out on LC. All that remains is for those whoclaim Christ to actuallybelieve the truth rather than avoiding it.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >