Will Broadway dim the lights for "Chicago" musical Jeff Loeffelholz?

I doubt it, though he deserves that honor.

Forgive my ignorance, but who is Jeff and what happened to him?

EDIT: I see he has understudied Mary Sunshine for twenty years.

Updated On: 7/5/18 at 08:26 AM

I remember first seeing Mr. L at Don't Tell Mama back in 1985 or 86, doing his soprano act. Although his voice was perhaps not quite as high and effortless as the originator of Mary Sunshine (Michael O'Haughey), he was entertaining. I can't help but think it must be odd to be an understudy for more than 20 years for one show, but the financial security must have been nice. The "reports" of his demise are strange, to say the least.

Updated On: 7/5/18 at 09:00 AM

I remember his Dangerous Duets act, but I don't remember who he sang with. They used to do promos for this show at Eighty-Eights in the late 80s.

Does any know how many times in 20+ years Jeff went on as Mary Sunshine?

I don't get to NYC as often as I would like, so show websites are one way I stay connected. Shows open and close, actors come and go, but Jeff was always there in the cast roster. It was only after the tragic news that I learned he had a run-of-show contract, so then it made sense.

I am Jeff’s cousin. My grandmother is his aunt, my mother is his first cousin, I am his second cousin. The family is devastated. What is also devastating is that because almost all of Jeff's family is in Oklahoma and things are trying to be “swept under the rug” about his suicide by some people in your community, many of us are still confused about the circumstances surrounding his victimization and subsequent suicide. Yes, I said “victimization and subsequent suicide.” His partner of 33 years has been trying to give us the facts, but as you can imagine he has a lot going on. We are left to gather facts ourselves and help each other understand. Jeff was not on social media and our only contact with him aside from his personal cell phone was through his partner. I have seen many posts on various sites downplaying the role of bullying and harassment by people in power roles of his production. Things have been posted to the degree of “directors do things like this all the time to get the performance they want,” and “if he took his own life because of a little criticism then he clearly had other issues.” We are his family. We know there were no other issues. It is highly unethical for anyone in a position of power to use the privileges of their power to humiliate or harass someone (in any profession). Things are a bit blurry when it comes to wanting to inspire better performance, but what I have learned (from several sources) is that was not the motivation of those bullying Jeff. The people responsible for the way he was being treated were clearly trying to harass and humiliate him into quitting. The rules of the contract were clear, if the production wished to end the contract, they were bound to buy Jeff out of the contract for a specific sum (nothing outrageous). They could fire him with a justifiable reason, but they had none. He had zero complaints in his file. Instead, those in power used that power to try and force him to quit, which is not only unethical, but against Equity regulations. ROP (run-of-play) contracts may seem unfair and outdated, but that doesn't matter because IT IS A CONTRACT. All people involved have to follow the terms, and any attempt to gain something (trying to get Jeff to quit) by means not outlined in the contract (blatant harassment instead of buying him out) is unethical and the one of the reasons Equity has a policy against harassment in the first place. If a child or young adult was being harassed and took their own life, you would be outraged. Just because Jeff was an adult doesn't mean that he should have “had thicker skin" or “just taken it like a man”. Bullying is still bullying. He felt trapped. He felt like there was no other choice. Shame on anyone who made him feel like that through unethical harassment and humiliation, just to save a little money.

I think the best way to honor Jeff's life is to remind the community that nobody is powerless. If you feel you've been harassed or treated unfairly by your producers or powers that be - reach out to your union - they are there to protect you. If you feel you have no other choice but to take your own life - reach out to someone - anyone - your cry for help will be heard. The biggest tragedy in this situation is seeing the huge outpouring of love for Jeff from his community - and from strangers who never knew him and realizing that still somehow, Jeff thought ending his own life was the best or maybe only option.

My condolences for your loss, MosaicOwl.

Without rendering a judgment on what prompted this man to take his life....if what I’ve read elsewhere is true and he could have been bought out of his contract for $30,000...big bucks to me but it seems like small potatoes in the world we’re talking about. Why even risk the bad publicity, the possibility of a lawsuit, or make the effort to make someone miserable enough to quit...why not write the check and show him the door? Aren’t contract payoffs a cost of doing business when a lead just isn’t working out and a change needs to be made...let alone a standby (I am aware of the infamous Lapone/Webber tale but that was a lead role and a payoff wouldn’t have been cheap) And why not do something like this 5 or 10 years ago? Or am I showing how clueless I am on how this business operates or how petty and miserly some producers can be.... if the story we’re hearing is true?

Updated On: 7/6/18 at 03:51 PM

Even with a buyout, who's to say the outcome would have been any different?

I was trying to avoid making the connection between the incident and its potential outcome that got the other thread shut down. I was wondering what could possibly be worth it on the production side to even risk such turmoil over a simple decision and a relatively paltry amount?



Added to reflect adamgreer’s quick response: Hah...well, there’s a picture of my father in law in some dictionaries next to the definition of cheap... I guess maybe he just wasn’t hateful and spiteful as well...

Updated On: 7/6/18 at 04:32 PM

The reason production risked the possible turmoil over just paying the buyout is because of a pattern of behavior that until the past week went without consequence. Under the scientific laws of punishment (punishment as a behavioral term in the field of behavior analysis), a specific behavior is less likely to occur in the future if there is a consequence of punishment. Without contingent punishment, the behavior will continue. Not to mention the reinforcing effects of all the actors that quit because of this behavior by production. The law of reinforcement states that a behavior is more likely to occur in the future when there is contingent reinforcement for the behavior. In this case, production was being reinforced for harassment by each target voluntarily quitting as a result of the harassment. It made harassment a continuing pattern of behavior, because it always produced a desirable outcome. I'm not sure if anything quite like this outcome has occurred before, but it most definitely will have a diminishing effect on the harassment, especially if word gets out and there are consequences that are undesirable for those who emitted the behavior. If anyone doubts any of these principles, I'd be happy to show you my notes from my studies at the Department of Behavior Analysis at The University of North Texas. My GPA was 3.86.