Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Oh, no, Shipley’s

Disgusting.

Three former Shipley Do-Nuts employees are suing the company’s owner for allegedly groping them and making racist remarks, accusations that are consistent with a bevy of civil rights lawsuits filed by former workers since 2004.

The women claim that Lawrence Shipley III “regularly subjected them to unwelcome touching, other inappropriate physical behavior and unwelcome sexual comments,” according to a lawsuit filed in Harris County on Friday against the donut company and its owner.

“(Shipley) hugged Elizabeth Peralta tight across her front and touched her rear and buttocks,” the suit says. “He stared at her breasts and crotch areas. He spanked her rear.”

The other plaintiffs allege similar action from Shipley while working at the Houston-based chain’s North Main Street location. During one incident, plaintiff Esmeralda Sanchez claims Shipley did not punish a male supervisor who made sexual innuendos to her, instead saying that the way she dressed encouraged the behavior. They seek more than $1 million in damages.

The three women are also plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit filed against the company last year for failing to pay overtime, an allegation that’s been lodged many times against the company in suits.

In an email Sunday, Lawrence Shipley said his accusers were caught “red-handed in an elaborate corruption scheme whereby they duped the Shipley companies and more than 20 franchisees out of legitimate delivery and freight services for their own financial gain.”

“And if I were to become somebody I’m not and stumble over to the dark side, it wouldn’t be with these low lifes,” he wrote. “What a baseless, pathetic accusation. That’s my comment.”

An attorney for the three women said it was unclear what Shipley meant in his statement. Karla Evans Epperson said she was not aware of any legal actions against her clients that would explain Shipley’s comments. Two of the women worked in housekeeping, and the other did clerical work, according to the first suit.

Epperson said she wasn’t surprised by Shipley’s comments, though.

“This isn’t his first rodeo,” she said.

There’s more, so go read the rest. That North Main location is where I take the girls for donuts when they convince us to buy them. Not anymore. I will not darken the doorstep of a Shipley’s till this jackass has sold his shares and they have put in real reforms to treat their employees better and prevent crap like this in the future. What a damn shame.

Related Posts:

7 Comments

  1. Flypusher says:

    “An attorney for the three women said it was unclear what Shipley meant in his statement. Karla Evans Epperson said she was not aware of any legal actions against her clients that would explain Shipley’s comments. Two of the women worked in housekeeping, and the other did clerical work, according to the first suit.”

    But working in housekeeping is the PERFECT cover for embezzlement/financial shenanigans. Who’d even suspect them, except for a thinking outside the box genius like Shipley?

  2. Bill Daniels says:

    Fly:

    Want to talk about financial shenanigans? OK, how about extortion, which is what this is.

    I don’t know what did or didn’t happen, but I am sick and tired of lawsuit lotto. Even if everything alleged is all true, it ain’t worth a third of a million each. If the woman was spanked, where’s the police report? I’m guessing there isn’t one.

    If this happened, it’s not like there are a shortage of housekeeping positions. Why didn’t they find other jobs? Sorry regardless of the facts, I hope the plaintiffs lose. If someone spanked me and looked at my crotch, it ain’t worth a third of a million dollars. I’m not that expensive, and neither is Peralta.

  3. penwyth says:

    Reading Bill’s post now….head slap, head shake.

  4. Bill Daniels says:

    Penwyth,

    I’m available to be spanked and ogled. Please post your financials so I know how much I should sue for.

  5. Flypusher says:

    You do a whole lot of assuming there. I didn’t comment on the merits of either sides’ story, other than noting that accusing the cleaning staff of that sort of theft is a really implausible defense.

    Why don’t they find other jobs if their stories are true? Why are you so eager to put all the burden on the victims, but none on the perpetrators? Your type of attitude is a major reason why this problem persists. You decry the “lawsuit lotto”, but that’s what you get if victims don’t have other recourses.

  6. Flypusher says:

    You blew it Bill. You’re on record as having consented.

  7. Bill Daniels says:

    Having a tight, cogent hypothetical does not equal consent. Way to victim shame there, Fly. 🙂