I Believe Her

Sherwin-Williams has been served with two new lawsuits, only one of which is the result of their malfeasance in Rochester.

Filed in federal District Court, one complaint accuses Sherwin of operating, “Negligently and with conscious disregard to public health and safety,” resulting in the “emission of noxious odors” beyond their property at 372 Cleveland Street. 

All of which is true according to Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), who continues to allow Sherwin to operate illegally there, for reasons they will one day have to explain.  Before that can happen all the facts must become known, which discovery in these cases should allow for.  And in the cases still to come, making these the first droplets of a torrent yet to come for Sherwin in the courts. 

More to Come

My investigations of Sherwin-Williams have expanded significantly over the course of this year, added breadth allowed when my coverage of the 401(k) cut and the Christmas Eve layoffs engendered a sizable response from both current and former employees.  Many of whom were victims of wage theft, which continues to destroy morale among the company’s estimated 5,500 store managers, nearly all of whom are victims of that crime.

Many of the others were also victims of crimes perpetrated by Sherwin, some of whom have given testimony so detailed that only a few witnesses exist to the crimes they allege.  Which keeps those stories from these pages, ensuring the source’s anonymity, which I am honor bound to maintain.

With them are other findings of my investigations which have to date gone unpublished, for my own protection from a company with a penchant to retaliate.  Though a new lawsuit filed against Sherwin last week allows enough cover to expand my reporting here, to more fully detail the work environment at Sherwin-Williams, which I used to describe as toxic until the company proved in Rochester that that word was misapplied.  Where retribution is de rigueur as is sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and an overall hostile work environment towards women, according to a former employee who sued the company for those things last week.  Her complaint alleges she was fired after reporting sexual harassment to Sherwin’s Human Resources department, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. 

Which others have also told me happens there.

Sherwin can add these cases to the pile, which will continue to grow in the months ahead with momentum building to crescendo several years from now.  Enough time for the municipalities Sherwin shits on in the Rochester area to get their acts together and force the company to clean up the manifestation of their logo.     

Beyond pollution, wage theft, sexual discrimination and retribution I am also investigating executive misuse of funds and other securities frauds at Sherwin-Williams, as well as other violations of labor laws not previously mentioned here. Each investigation was initiated when a Sherwin-Williams employee or former one contacted me and made credible allegations of wrongdoing, which to date this year there has been no shortage of.

Many with traumas exposing a corrosive work environment at Sherwin, like this former employee who like the plaintiff in this case, claimed her career was cut short by Sherwin's failure to keep her safe from the men she worked with.

Perhaps explaining why I believe the plaintiff.

©Mark Lipton 2026

Retreating from the front pages is the news of the paint peeling at the Reflecting Pool on the National Mall, fenced off during the July 4^th celebration. 

CNN reported that the opportunity to recoat the pool was first offered to SIKA, which had installed the existing waterproof concrete during a previous renovation.  But the company refused, telling the Times that demands the pool be completed by July 4^th and be blue made the project “unfeasible.”  Though they could have said impossible and also have been correct.  With the president and contractor both promising touch ups, paint geeks have been wondering how that could be, considering that the coating in place is intended to be monolithic, with no known specification for touching up or re-coating. 

Though it seems they're going to try.