LONDON -- Morgan Stanley last month agreed to a $54 million out-of-court settlement to ensure that serious allegations of sexual discrimination against it did not come to trial in the United States. The bank proclaimed its innocence, but if it really had nothing to hide, why didn't it let the evidence be presented and refuted? Many observers are likely to take the view that "there is no smoke without fire."

Morgan Stanley is not the only firm of late to be accused of serious discrimination against female employees. A number of cases are being brought before industrial tribunals in Britain. Some allegations suggest not only the existence of a male macho culture in the world of finance but also some pretty nasty behavior on the part of a number of overpaid young executives who seem little better than puppies that have yet to be housebroken.

At some companies, it seems that women executives are treated as if they were maids or waitresses, and sexual innuendos and uncouth remarks are commonplace. Such companies and their male-chauvinist managers deserve to be taken to court and made to pay compensation. But, although it is now easier to bring cases before tribunals, it seems probable that many women are unwilling to face the trauma of collecting and giving evidence; they either resign themselves to being bullied or accept compensation when it may be offered.