Broadway usher fired for sneaking into performance of RAISIN attended by the Obamas- Page 4

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 1:52pm

"She meant well, but she made a hugely ill-advised decision and is now paying for it. That's life."

Exactly.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 1:53pm

The writing of that article is atrocious, beneath the dignity of the New York Times and the usher involved.

The Lilias White comment at the end of the article makes no sense. It is a complete non sequitur. And this sentence from the next-to-last paragraph is just plain stupid:

Mostly, as she sat talking with me, with her sky-blue top and black satin pants and those eyes that glint at any talk of the theater, she seemed like a woman standing outside her home, knocking hard and begging to be let back in again.

WTF?

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 1:58pm

Fisherman Bob, exactly.

Security for these events is determined and planned way in advance of the date. The security personnel comes to the venue, inspects it, plans the procedure, and meets the administration. At that point they would meet the HM and it would be made clear that he or she is the one who security should go to with any questions.

At least that was the protocol used whenever we had foreign dignitaries.

[Up In One]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:07pm

This is an issue for the secret service and whoever managed the security for the night. If she lied her way in that's one thing but if she was passed in that's another. Where's the list of who was cleared and who was checking names? "You embarrassed us so you are fired?" What happened to the buck stops here? - If this was such an infraction someone's head much higher up in the organization should have rolled. If she was the only person terminated this is a serious case of overreaction. I hope either the President or his wife gets involved or one of the other theatre owners offers her a job and cashes in on the publicity.

Someone call Jordon Roth over at Jujamcyn

Updated On: 6/12/14 at 02:07 PM

[Gothampc]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:11pm

"The Lilias White comment at the end of the article makes no sense."

You can't question that or you'll be called racist.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:13pm

"I hope either the President or his wife gets involved or one of the other theatre owners offers her a job and cashes in on the publicity."

Yes, while Iraq is being overtaken by Islamist militants who are enforcing Sharia law (that means death to gays), the President should get involved in getting a Broadway usher her job back.

[Marianne2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:45pm

Why should the Obama's get involved? The woman was not supposed to be there, plain and simple. Whether she was allowed in by someone she works with or the Secret Service, she still should have only been there to work that night or get in by purchasing a ticket.

[Adair Haywind]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:50pm

I do sympathize with her. I would've wanted to be there for a performance attended by the President as well, but she should have purchased a ticket or at least asked the House Manager if it was ok for her to help out if she wanted in that badly on a night she didn't work. The firing may be a little harsh, but it is justified.

[artscallion]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 2:59pm

I'd like to know what she was wearing. That would say a lot about whether or not she was being deceitful. If she was wearing her usher "uniform" when she wasn't working, that would mean that she was clearly trying to trick people into thinking she was working when she wasn't. If she had street clothes on, then I think she was just an employee thinking she's got an "in" to a special event because she works there...no deceit involved.

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:02pm

I hear what you're saying Scallion, but I don't think it matters what she wore. She was in a place that she wasn't supposed to be. Although she meant no harm to the president, it's not up to the SS to read minds.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:08pm

Can I see a show of hands: How many people posting in this thread think they can sneak into an event at which President Obama is attending?

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:17pm

I sneaked in to see him speak at St. Peter's College here in Jersey City. But he wasn't President yet. It was during the 08 primaries.

[Up In One]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:24pm

"Sneak" is the operative word. Did she? We don't know enough about the situation. Were they informed or warned previously. We are reacting emotionally and our reactions are telling.

That couple who got into the White House ball a few years back, that was premeditated and orchestrated for their own benefit. What benefit did this woman receive other than an emotional thrill?

Since we are playing detective I think it was the person who saw her coming out that is the culprit here. If she had left in the crowd and wasn't seen on the way out it would have been as if it never happened. You question the person, you suspend, and have the SS investigate, but immediate termination and placing a ban with wanted pictures please ... I'm surprised more of us aren't sympathetic. Unless there is more to this than we know - and there always usually is.

Updated On: 6/12/14 at 03:24 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:27pm

Didn't the article say she also has a group sales business of her own? I wonder if that'll be effected, or if it had any play into the Shubert decision.

[viola13]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:37pm

I was an usher at another theatre with the President in attendance for a fundraising event. We knew weeks in advance who was working, because the secret service needed to do background checks on all the employees. To enter, our house manager stood at the entrance and checked us off as we went in, after we showed ID that we worked at the theater. So I see why this was a huge breach in security and why she was fired, but it's probably not just the usher's fault for being able to get in in the first place.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 3:55pm

"I hope either the President or his wife gets involved"

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:00pm

Not only was she a threat to security regardless of her intentions, I would imagine that she was also an insurance liability given the fact that she was not on the clock and she was not holding a ticket for that performance. There's more to this than people realize.

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:00pm

I just reread the article. The House Manager gave the initial ok for her to enter. The article says there was a list of who may enter and who was blocked. So now I wonder if anyone checked that list.

Also, the House Manager was fully educated about the protocol that was to be followed that night. So he/she either didn't even know who was working that night, or stupidly thought it was ok for the usher to come in even though she wasn't working.

Also, the article said that the usher, upon exiting the theater, told the apprentice that she was there to "help out." She made that up, there was no such helping out.

This whole thing doesn't make sense until we know all the details, which we won't!

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:03pm

CAts, you are correct. Because of insurance, no one may enter a theater unless they hold tickets. Insurance will not cover a person who is unauthorized to be inside, should there be an accident. So again, the House Manager should have known that.

[Nateholder]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:12pm

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:15pm

^ Who did you used to be?

[RaisedOnMusicals]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:17pm

So a poster named Owen22 posted about this here this morning, just as this thread started and swollowed up his thread. I responded immediately, as follows, with some questions for the original poster, who proclaimed that the firing was wrong, urging us to protest. I'm still waiting for a response:

"(and I hope you do as this firing was just wrong)."

Owen22, a few questions:

1. Why was the firing wrong in your opinion? What should the Shubert Organization have done?

2. Does it bother you that in addition to having used her position to gain entrance to a high security area where she should not have been, she lied about why she was there when asked what she had been doing. ("I was just there to help out.")

3. Do you think that her color factored into the firing decision at all, or, for that matter, into this story being in the NYT?

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:28pm

I'm going to be the lone voice of dissent and Im ok with that. I think the actors on Facebook who are outraged are looking at Deborah the person and her accomplishments. They aren't seeing the infraction and I totally get that. She is dear to them and I'm on their side.

I only get to NYC 2-3 times a year and I am acquainted with Debbie. She is really top notch and views theatre as sacred. She is what theatre is all about. It's not a job-its her life.

I think she got starry-eyed, views the theatres as her second home and made a mistake. I think the person who passed her in is truly in the wrong. Once a supervisor let me in, I'd assume I was in the clear.

Also, with that many years of service she may have assumed she was a known entity and it was ok. That's naïve, I know but plausible.

Debbie is salt of the earth and terribly respectful and good at her job.

She deserves to be reinstated.

Updated On: 6/12/14 at 04:28 PM

[Jane2]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:32pm

Devil's advocate here-if she was so valuable to the theater community and such a beloved fixture on the scene, why wasn't she scheduled to work that important performance?

It's just a matter of breaking a law. No matter how wonderful a person is, they have to pay the price of breaking a law.

BTW-I think the house manager is more guilty than she is.

[Kad]

Posted: 6/12/14 at 4:39pm

Who's more guilty: the one who knowingly tried to enter a place they weren't supposed to be, or the one who opened the door for them?