"being publicly seen as a den of sexism and racism is damaging to the brand and therefore to the shareholders" So they're the ones that publicly and overtly ha

"being publicly seen as a den of sexism and racism is damaging to the brand and therefore to the shareholders" So they're the ones that publicly and overtly harmed the company's image by going to the Washington Post and doing an interview slagging off their former company, so surely they're responsible for harming it's pubic image and reducing the share value. Also, the lawsuit will be classic Streisand effect. If they want to commence legal action regarding alleged discrimination that's perfectly within their prerogative. Going to lengths to make the lawsuit public is not necessary, and would certainly be against any responsible lawyer's advice.