Ex-Morgan Stanley Advisor Says Co-Worker Proposed Honeypot Scheme
What You Need to Know
The male co-worker’s suggestion, as the advisor understood, was to use her looks to attract clients.
She contends that a toxic work environment led her to resign in 2022.
The financial services company denies the allegations.
A former Morgan Stanley financial advisor has filed a discrimination and harassment lawsuit against the firm, her male supervisor and a male colleague, alleging that the co-worker proposed running a honeypot operation to attract clients, among other toxic behavior.
Within the first three months that they worked together, the colleague proposed to plaintiff “that they run ‘operation honeypot,’ where (she) and her other attractive female friends would go to events with (his) ‘rich guy friends,’” the lawsuit filed last week in Superior Court of New Jersey alleges.
She understood this to be a suggestion “that she should use her sex and her looks to ‘woo’ clients and or engage in quid pro quo to secure new clients,” the lawsuit contends.
Morgan Stanley hired Stewart as a financial advisor in January 2019 and in October that year promoted her to director of insurance and planning; she also continued her work as a financial advisor, according to the complaint.
Unable to tolerate the allegedly discriminatory, hostile and retaliatory environment, she resigned in May 2022, a move that Stewart describes as a constructive discharge.
When she was hired, Stewart reported directly to Richard Maratea and was partnered with Evan Silverman in her advising business, the lawsuit notes. Both men are defendants, along with Morgan Stanley Financial Advisors and others. Morgan Stanley’s website currently lists Maratea as branch manager in the company’s Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, office,
Maratea was responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation policies in connection with Stewart’s employment but “deliberately violated those duties,” she contends.
Soon after she started working for Morgan Stanley, Stewart alleges, she learned that the defendants had misrepresented Silverman’s skills, credentials and experience, and he started to demonstrate a lack of professionalism toward and about her in the workplace.
As a result, Stewart struggled to perform her duties while also ensuring that Silverman’s work was being done properly and in accordance with regulations, the lawsuit contends.
While she performed her duties in a commendable manner, Stewart “was subjected to demeaning comments and harassing behavior” by Maratea and Silverman based on her gender, she alleges.
When Stewart alerted Maratea to her issues with Silverman on various occasions in 2019 and 2020, Maratea was dismissive and made repeated references to his and Silverman’s belief that she was distracted from her work, the suit contends.
Maratea also indicated that he didn’t believe the firm had gotten its money’s worth from her considering money expended defending Stewart in litigation with her prior employer, and that Silverman “was carrying the weight of their partnership,” she alleges.
Silverman continued to engage in discriminatory or disparaging remarks about Stewart, including discussing her dating life and prior marriage with other men in the workplace and referring to her as “Female Financial Advisor” or “sexual harassment panda,” a reference to a character on the TV show “South Park,” she alleges.
In addition, Stewart contends that Silverman shared her personal information with her former boyfriend, leading her to become a victim of home invasion and several violent assaults by that ex-boyfriend and having to seek a restraining order, according to the lawsuit.
