I almost called this, “Stop Making Me Defend Robert De Niro!’
De Niro proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he’s a toxic, narcissistic asshole when he was going around the country shouting “Fuck Trump” at various Trump Derangement gatherings. He’s a great actor, but at 80 he’s now in that difficult period of decline when he should be retired but can’t resist the paychecks or the sudden lack of public attention.
De Niro’s ex-personal assistant Graham Chase Robinson is suing him for discrimination, and the trial is not showing the actor in a very favorable light. As her various allegations were presented to him on the stand—-asking her to scratch his back, giving her degrading tasks, making unreasonable demands (like asking Robinson to “Uber him” a martini from a favorite bar at 11 p.m.), not respecting her personal time (he called her twice while she was at her grandmother’s funeral telling her to buy a bus ticket for his son), and being abusive (he called her a “fucking spoiled brat”), De Niro’s response was always some version of, “Big deal. So what?”
De Niro paid his personal assistant $300,000 a year.
Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…
Is it unethical for someone to pay an assistant to accept abuse and disrespectful treatment?
I am torn on the issue. If there are no credible allegations of sexual harassment, I think De Niro’s not unreasonable position is: “Hey, for all that money, you can tolerate the less attractive aspects of my personality. If you don’t like it, there are plenty of others who’ll be happy to take your job.” The other view is that there’s no excuse for treating employees badly no matter what you are paying them.
It sure looks as if this is one of those law suits against celebrities where a litigant is banking on a lucrative settlement because the celebrity doesn’t want to be embarrassed. De Niro has also sued Robinson for stealing from him.
Looking back on my varied career stops, I once took a job from a boss who said, “I’m tough to work for. I expect a lot, and can be a real bastard sometimes.” And he was. But it was still a great experience. If his occasional outbursts and unreasonable conduct ever crossed a line, I would have quit. My tolerance level would have been a lot higher if he had paid me $300,000, that’s for sure.
Ethics Alarms 
“The other view is that there’s no excuse for treating employees badly no matter what you are paying them.”
This is my opinion. Paying people any amount of money to take abuse is not ethical. It’s no different, in my opinion, from paying drunks money to dance for you or offering a big prize to dance contestants willing to risk their health or lives. It’s taking advantage of them.
Paying NFL players to sustain long-term crippling brain injuries?
Over at Althouse, who discussed the case from a legal (not ethical) perspective, several commenters wrote, “Hell, for $300,000, I’D scratch his back!”
Yep, especially if they aren’t clear that they’re signing up for that.
Not that it would make it more ethical. After all, drunks know they’re signing up for humiliation and you knew you were signing up for a difficult time when you took that job. It’s good that you found a positive side to the situation, but it’s still not right to mistreat someone just because that person is being paid.
I would have to know more about what the working contract entailed. For 300k a year, I wouldn’t say any of those request were unreasonable.
It reminds me of that joke I heard a long time ago.
Male: Will you sleep with me for 1 million dollars?
Female: Okay.
Male: How about $10?
Female: What kind of woman do you think I am?
Male: We have already established what kind of woman you are, now we are just negotiating price.
If its not illegal or sexual, you know what you’re getting into (and with a person like him, she had to have known), and your willing to accept money for it, then I can’t see it being unethical.
Hmm, now that I think about it, what would Kant say to someone who willing puts themselves into a situation like this? How would he treat willing sex workers like OnlyFans models?
What I’m hearing is that they both should have negotiated the job description to set mutual expectations on duties and the limits thereof, and done so every time they ran into a situation they didn’t expect. That’s how healthy sustained relationships work, personal and professional. Failure to do that on either of their parts does not constitute “discrimination”.
If such demands are wrong at a lower salary then such demands are wrong at high salaries.
Simply because someone has the money to pay another to compensate for abuse does not make abuse ethical.
If we allow people to claim they are paying handsomely to get what they want those privileged few will learn they can treat everyone the same way even without payment. Do we want to incentivize narcissistic behaviors?
Right. What is the price of dignity, after all?
This is a really slippery slope, though. I can name several BigLaw firms that demand 80 hour work-weeks or more from associates with the promise of rich partnerships down the road—maybe. I’d call that more abusive than asking for a back-scratch.
My perspective deals with the human relations element here and not the workload.
Earning 300k for 80 hours x 52 weeks equals $72 per hour. If you don’t want to commit to 4060 hours of work per year don’t take the job.
Any form of physical contact could be construed as sexual in nature and unless you are employed in a licensed occupation that requires physical contact any contact is suspect.
We cannot lament the lack of civility among the populace if we give the wealthy the ability to say “you have to take it for what I pay you”. My retort would be you pay me to be at your beck and call and not for your desire to diminish me.
Just because some women will allow you to grab their p——sy when you are wealthy does not mean it is ethical. There is no difference between that statement and the one that says some people will let you call them a dumb ass bitch simply because they are wealthy and paying you a high salary.
Less than $300K a year for a no skill “job” such as personal assistant. The guy has been a well-known asshole his entire life. He’s made a lucrative career of PLAYING assholes in movies. You asked for it, sweetheart. All you had to do was complain or quit. If making unreasonable demands of employees is actionable, every law firm in the country is going to be defending a lot of actions.
Beat me to it.
Perhaps the job description or title should amended to Personal Assistant/Trainer for my jerk method acting personas… Then it would be ethical.
Exactly.
jvb
I wouldn’t take a job that required me to be on call weekends if they paid me $10/hr. If they were paying me $200/hr, fine. I know IT people who make a lot of money because they are willing to take the 3 AM call from some attorney and go into the office to add paper to the printer. Many people are willing to put up with doing annoying stuff for annoying people if the price is right. Personal assistant to an actor seems like that type of job. What is a ‘personal assistant’ if it isn’t someone who does the annoying tasks at annoying times for annoying people?
This a classical case of “once an asshole always an asshole.” In this case, we have two assholes. He wants her to be at his beck and call, she wants the money but is unwilling to be at his beck and call. He is undignified, she didn’t read the small print of her contract.
I have no pity for either one.
Why would DeNiro retire? He just starred in Flowers of the Killer Moon. A highly acclaimed film that will probably be nominated for best picture.