Female Employee Alleges Discrimination At Tokensoft Blockchain Firm

Female Employee Alleges Discrimination At Blockchain Firm

As per an all new ‘harassment lawsuit’ filed under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) by Monette Stephens against well-known blockchain firm ‘TokenSoft’,  the plaintiff now bears “the burden of proof” while the defendant possesses the power “to clarify or reject any allegations that have been put forth against him/her”.

More On The Matter

A closer look at some of the specifics related to the case show us that the plaintiff is a 55-year-old woman who serves as the Head of Corporate Development for TokenSoft. Additionally, it has also come to light that Ms. Stephens holds a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering (as well as possesses Series 7, 24 and 63 FINRA investment banking qualifications).

According to court transcripts, Stephens claims that early last year, she requested the CEO of Tokensoft to accompany him to a blockchain conference in New York. He allegedly denied her request, claiming that there was no point in the two of them going together. Not only that, but she also claims to have been discriminated against financially by the startup — With Ms. Stephens stating in a court document that she received a highly lopsided salary package while her contemporaries had been given way more.

In response to the above-mentioned charges, TokenSoft’s executive brass allegedly issued the following statement back in 2018:

“We hired them after a venture capitalist colleague advised us to hire ‘young, hungry guys,’ who would be willing to work under a primarily commission-based structure with a lower
base salary than Plaintiff.”

Lastly, it should be pointed out that the plaintiff paints a narrative which tries to expose TokenSoft as being a misogynistic organization where elder female employees do not have any meaningful opportunities available to them.

Final Take

The law clearly states that any company (be it big or small) does not have the right to discriminate against its employees simply on the basis of their age or gender. In the case at hand, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof, however, if the lawsuit carries any weight to it, strict action should be doled out against the accused parties.