Melissa Errico Fired From PASSION?- Page 3

[ullabelt]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 8:48am

sickness has dogged several of her roles. I would have been moved the first time. I wanted to be a ballet dancer but I have bad knees so had to stop...are you moved by that? No. I got over it. So can she.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 8:54am

^^^^Except that she IS an accomplished singer/actress. And if you had just found out last week that you couldn't dance, of course I'd be sympathetic.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 8:58am

(G)iven what she's written describing her actions, is she being reasonable regarding what her level of responsibility might be for what's occurred?

What is her responsibility, John? I realize she didn't sign her contract, but both parties seem to be acting as if a valid contract existed.

Otherwise, what is her "responsibility"?

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 8:59am

Gaveston. Chill.

No one is bashing her - people are just questioning her decision to release intimate production details on a public forum (similar to the Adam Pascal fiasco). I can't believe there are already some posters on here, including Someone in a Tree, who are clutching their pearls over BWW's reaction. People have every right to question and doubt. It's a natural reaction. It doesn't have any impact on how one might feel sympathy or some kind of empathetic emotion.

[ullabelt]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 9:17am

No I dance for ten years and then found out.

I totally understand the pain she must feel, however its unprofessional, not to mention tacky, for her to blog about the intimate details of her contract and treatment (from her perspective).

I am totally interested in it, yes.

Its good gossip.

But when its realised into an open playing field do I feel for her? No.

She is using it to her advantage. She will carry on working. She'll survive. These things happen.

I dont feel for her because she simply doesnt need me to. As I said she will survive.

[John Adams]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 9:28am

What is her responsibility, John?

The first might be to read, sign and return her contract. I'm still wondering why she might indicate that she was "fired" when she purposefully took the time to prove (including several photos) that by her own [in]action, she had not signed and returned her contract. How could she be fired if she was not under contract?

but both parties seem to be acting as if a valid contract existed.

It's hard to say "both parties" when we've only heard from one. Don't know what the other side has to say, yet. Updated On: 6/12/13 at 09:28 AM

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 9:54am

One post on a message board, and you're comfortable diagnosing ullabelt as a sociopath, Gaveston?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:05am

I'm also pretty sure he doesn't know what crystal meth use looks like.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:11am

Ullabelt is my new favorite poster!

Ulla: where have you been hiding since 3/26/06?

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:17am

I confess I just skimmed the blog, so maybe the answer is in there (but I just can't go back there): If she'd not been officially replaced for the final two weeks, was there any indication of when she would have been able to return to the show?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:23am

I think in one of the other posts she alluded to the fact that she wanted them to hold on for one or two days, she'd then see her doctor and thought she'd get the all clear. Unless I read it wrong she did visit her doctor and did get the all clear, but she'd already been let go.

I have to admit that the notion of, "You can't let me go because of a clause in my contract because I never signed my contract!" is exactly like something I would do and say.

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:27am

Unless the Americans with Disabilities Act was repealed while I wasn't looking, it is NOT that easy to fire someone for being ill in the "real" world. You don't have to pay them after their sick and vacation time is used up and you can hire a temporary replacement, but their job has to be waiting for them when they are able to work again.

Gaveston, if you're referring to the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), then you're correct. I believe that your job has to be held for you for twelve weeks. However, you have to file for this consideration once your leave begins or shortly thereafter. My HR department made me file for this a few months ago as a precaution when I was having surgery and only intended to be out for two weeks. If she never signed her contract, something tells me she would not have known to file for FMLA.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:36am

theatretrash, thanks for the clarification, and I stand corrected. I just assumed that since the other blogs were posted over the same stretch of days that the last one must be locked, not unpublished.

I just wish that we'd have some sort of guideline over whom we're allowed to slam and who were not. I can't believe the calls for civility over the past few days would expected to cover people like like Jeremy Piven (or any number of the theatre professionals who DON'T inspire breathless pleas of acceptance for their foibles, or special consideration because they are too cute to be accused of bad acting or whatever). Not to mention, with perhaps the exception of a few of the expected sourpusses, no one is really saying anything really negative about Melissa Errico here.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:39am

Gaveston, if you're referring to the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), then you're correct. I believe that your job has to be held for you for twelve weeks. However, you have to file for this consideration once your leave begins or shortly thereafter. My HR department made me file for this a few months ago as a precaution when I was having surgery and only intended to be out for two weeks. If she never signed her contract, something tells me she would not have known to file for FMLA.

How would that work if you're in a position like Errico's, though? Her period of employment had a distinct end date, which happened to be two weeks after she started having problems. I'm not really knowledgeable about how anything works re: employment in theater, but I would be curious as to how something like FMLA would work with someone whose job is gone in two weeks anyway.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:49am

She says several times throughout the blog that Tuesday was her all-clear day. She was on vocal rest until Tuesday. And she intended to go on that evening and finish the last two weeks.

[philly03]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 10:57am

Given the injuries to her vocal chords she's had, I'm glad she's still getting work in musical theatre... Bad luck? Certainly, I feel for her for that.

But her track record is not good for these vocal rests... The tour of My Fair Lady w/ Richard Chamberlain she was in & out of (including a week before the first performance she was out!), though she did open on Broadway and get a Drama Desk nod (Like I said she is very talented).

DRACULA she was out for over a month as well... about two weeks after opening into October (which didnt even run that long to begin with), including missing performances every so often.

I don't think its so much slamming Errico when she (generally) gets great reviews, but has a not-so-surprising track record of vocal problems.

[ullabelt]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:11am

I try PalJoey :)

But seriously lets 'feel' for starving children or flood victimes. Girlfriend is going to be ok

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:16am

And the cold reality is that the production company has to protect themselves and thwart liability. If Errico had returned from vocal rest and then suffered additional injury performing the show, a case could have been argued for CSC being liable.

And, unfortunately, yes, in business, the correct means of communication for termination is to go through an agent. It sounds like Errico feels especially hurt by what she considers to be a lack of personal graciousness on the part of CSC, but when situations like this happen -- they have to go through proper channels. Communication regarding anything that could even be hinted at to be work related is a very slippery legal slope.
Updated On: 6/12/13 at 11:16 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:17am

And at that point the lawyers would say nobody forced her to come back to work, it's not like she had a contract.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:19am

Thanks, iluv. I see now that she said that was her hope. Of course, there was no way for the company to know that she would get the all clear on that Tuesday.

I'm just sorry I didn't get to see her in the role.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:20am

Phyllis: "I just wish that we'd have some sort of guideline over whom we're allowed to slam and who we're not. "

That's a good question, Phyl. Posters have accused me of clutching pearls in my defense of folks like Errico (and even Pascal) when it felt to me like their displays of honesty were being met with gleeful slams: "If you can't do the job you can't do the job."

No-one's slashed Errico to ribbons yet, it's true. (Yay!) It's just odd to see posters I respect dump on Gaveston, myself and others who are happy to give Melissa the benefit of the doubt.

Updated On: 6/12/13 at 11:20 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:24am

Well, the contract thing -- I think Errico sort of wanted it both ways. Not returning your signed contract (even unintentionally) somewhat demeans the professional expectations of the project and makes it feel like more of just an 'agreement' between friendly professionals who are coming to work together at a small Off Broadway company for scale. Clearly, CSC was operating on trust in not demanding she return it (or else they are just supremely disorganized, which Errico sort of alludes to).

Errico seems to have felt like that kind of friendly-off the books mentality should have carried over to her dismissal, but when liability is at stake -- that simply can not be.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:41am

Someone in a Tree - your tolerance for criticism and debate must be really low. Who has "dumped" on you, exactly? I think civility is commendable, admirable, and necessary. What you perceive as slashing, bashing, and dumping may be perceived by someone else as commenting, critiquing, or just simply questioning. I think both you and Gaveston are trying to read into something that just isn't here.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:52am

^ "I can't believe there are already some posters on here, including Someone in a Tree, who are clutching their pearls over BWW's reaction."

Who wrote that? Oh wait, you did, Headband.

My tolerance for criticism and debate is infinite when it comes to theater performance, set design, music and lyric writing, playwriting, all the things that make up Broadway theater. My tolerance lessens markedly when performers OFF-stage are laid on the examination table ready for dissection.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/12/13 at 11:55am

Even if they choose to reveal all of the gory details on a public blog that provides unfettered access to complete strangers?