▁law suit , ▁the ▁company ▁and ▁both ▁Wein ste ins ▁were ▁accused ▁of ▁viol ating ▁civil ▁rights ▁and ▁gender ▁disc rim ination ▁laws , ▁stating ▁that ▁it ▁had ▁" re pe ated ly ▁and ▁persist ently ▁treated ▁female ▁employees ▁less ▁well ▁than ▁male - emp loy ees ▁through ▁gender - based ▁host ile ▁work place ▁har ass ment , ▁qu id ▁pro ▁qu o ▁har ass ment , ▁and ▁disc rim ination " ▁by ▁maintain ing ▁" a ▁group ▁of ▁female ▁employees ▁whose ▁primary ▁job ▁it ▁was ▁to ▁accomp any ▁H W ▁( s ic ) ▁to ▁events ▁and ▁to ▁facil itate ▁H W ’ s ▁sexual ▁con quest s ". ▁In ▁addition , ▁the ▁law suit ▁includes ▁information ▁that ▁the ▁company ' s ▁Chief ▁Oper ating ▁Officer ▁communic ated ▁with ▁the ▁Human ▁Resources ▁Director ▁about ▁compla ints ▁where ▁settlement s ▁and ▁non - dis closure ▁agre ements ▁were ▁needed , ▁with ▁the ▁H . R . ▁Director ▁not ▁being ▁involved ▁in ▁any ▁investigation ▁or ▁resolution ▁process ▁" on ▁more ▁than ▁one ▁occasion ", ▁and ▁details ▁on ▁ver bal ▁ab use ▁and ▁thre ats ▁by ▁Har vey ▁Wein stein ▁that ▁he ▁would ▁( in ▁subst ance ) ▁kill ▁employees , ▁directly ▁or ▁indirect ly ▁via ▁claims ▁that ▁he ▁" had ▁connections ▁to ▁the ▁Secret ▁Service ▁who ▁could ▁solve ▁problems ▁for ▁him ". ▁ ▁In ▁fil ing ▁the ▁law suit , ▁Schne id erman ▁sought ▁to ▁force ▁the ▁company ▁to ▁address ▁several ▁points : ▁to ▁give ▁up ▁non - dis closure ▁agre ements ▁with