20 ms·

Lawyer lawyer lawyer LAWYER lawyer LAWYER. I think the consensus in the grown-up business world is "fire immediately for cause." I would bet substantial money

• harryh 10y ago
  In addition to patio11's excellent advice it's time to get some training on this. Possibly the lawyer you're going to hire can do this. Possibly they can refer you to someone appropriate. There are very well established procedures for how to deal with this sort of thing. You need to know them. Depending on the size of your company your managers might need to know them too. Hacker News is not the best place to learn them as most people here aren't experts in the field. There are experts that will teach you for a very reasonable fee.
  • jonnathanson 10y ago
    I can't upvote this enough. Patrick's advice is very sound. (Except, perhaps, for that last bit about what to say in an email to employees -- before sending any such email, please refer to Patrick's earlier, superseding advice to "Lawyer Lawyer Lawyer." Let your lawyer basically dictate what your email will say.) There are ways of handling this that have been worked out through decades of practice and litigation. This is most certainly not an area to be winging it. And, with all due respect to the thoughtful posts on HN you'll encounter, you should always keep in mind that HN is not a free source of legal advice. Since this has now happened, you'll want to a) lawyer up; b) terminate the offending employee for cause; c) work with the lawyer to set up some sort of HR training for managers in how to appropriately handle these situations. It might also be time to reemphasize the employee handbook and make known your zero-tolerance policy towards harassment. (But again, consult a lawyer before doing so.)
    • harryh 10y ago
      Just to add on a bit more you are probably right about "b) terminate the offending employee for cause" but before you do that you almost certainly have to give the employee a chance to respond to the accusations. If you just fire him before doing that you are likely opening yourself up to a lawsuit for wrongful termination. Yet again, this is something that a lawyer will help you handle correctly.
      • tptacek 10y ago
        This is the second comment on the thread I've seen invoking "wrongful termination". By all means, get your lawyer to confirm this fact for you, but: assuming you had the bare minimum competent legal assistance in setting up your company and its hiring documents, there is practically no such thing as wrongful termination in the US. In particular: if it is lawful for you to fire someone at all, it is probably no less lawful to fire them over a good-faith mistake. Obviously, there are any number of things you can blunder into with your employment documents that can create a colorable claim for wrongful termination. But the reason everyone uses the same boilerplate legalese employment documents is precisely to avoid these kinds of claims, and to firmly establish at-will employment with no implied contracts of job security. If you think you have an argument that firing this bizdev guy is legally tenuous, I have bad news for you: in your company, it is also legally tenuous to fire a developer who has only ever managed to push code that rm'd your prod environment.
  • baconner 10y ago
    Also to add to this great advice when you do have workplace harassment prevention, response training one of the things that will emphasize is that the response can't be purely up to the victim. A good training on this will help you explain this necessity to an employee in this circumstance. Basically 1. You've got the victim's back and will be carefully watching for any form of reprisals which won't be tolerated. Further you will not share any information about the specifics with the rest of the group even though you may have to address the issue generally with them. 2. But... You also have to take action as a responsible manager even if they don't want you to because you have to protect other employees from harassment by the same person. You also have a responsibility to the company to take action because not doing so can open the business up to serious liability if it happens again and you didn't do something. I think hitting a first serious hr issue like this is a part of the regular part of growing up for many startups. If you don't yet have a clear harassment policy in place, or don't have a lawyer advising you on these kind of issues, or haven't enacted any kind of regular training on harassment prevention and response there's no time like the present to get that done. ps. My company uses an online course from this company for yearly harassment prevention training. The production value is a bit cheesy, but very informative your first time through: http://www.navexglobal.com/en-us/issues/harrassment-discrimination http://www.navexglobal.com/en-us/issues/harrassment-discrimi... I'm sure there are tons of other options.
• berntb 10y ago
  I assume this is correct? On the other hand, the message here is: You better never, ever try to date anyone at work. Even if you're not so clumsy as that guy. Sad. Edit: OK, Milf is beyond "clumsy".
• paulsutter 10y ago
  While there's no question he needs to leave, the way you handle this is an opportunity. If you act skillfully, employees in general will be more willing to share problems with you in the future. You can reach the end result without making the wronged employee feel even one bit guilty. Have the lawyer spend time walking you through the various ways this can play out, rather than just give you a cookie-cutter procedure. With this knowledge you will feel confident about the way you communicate his departure to him, to the employee who has been wronged, and to the company in general. The human subtleties here matter as much as the legalities. Rely on the lawyer for the latter, and yourself for the former.
• Alex3917 10y ago
  > I think the consensus in the grown-up business world is "fire immediately for cause." I think the normal business advice would be to 'suspend pending investigation', and then wait for a neutral third party to recommend firing.
• falcolas 10y ago
  > I think the consensus in the grown-up business world is "fire immediately for cause." Not in my experience, and it's not the law (as taught in the myriad of training courses I've endured over the years). The man should have an opportunity to learn from this mistake, then be fired when he proves incapable of learning. Providing the warning and training is enough to legally cover the company's ass if the guy screws up again. Yes, it's a big mistake to make, but when your hiring pool is predominately college graduates, it's pretty likely they don't know the law (or how to navigate romance in the workplace) either. Time to educate them. EDIT: It's also important to get the other side of the story; why did this guy feel it was appropriate to approach the woman in the first place? Were there conversations not included in the record? Was there body language the man misinterpreted?
  • NateDad 10y ago
    It's not a mistake. He didn't leave the server room door open. He called her a MILF.... TO HER FACE. He's not 12 (I assume). If he hasn't learned to be respectful to women before now, it's not this guy's job to teach him.
    • falcolas 10y ago
      Per the side of the story we know. Do you know something not present in this narrative? The use of 'milf', whether it's derogatory or a compliment, will depend entirely on the context of the larger conversation. Something we don't have. Something which apparently the OP didn't have either.
      • icebraining 10y ago
        And she felt so flattered that she went to her boss to show him the texts?
        • kstrauser 10y ago
          That's the clincher for me. If she'd enjoyed that - and it's at least conceivable that someone would take it as a compliment - then the boss wouldn't know and no harm would be done. Remember, it's perfectly legal to date your coworkers. You can ask them out and everything! But the moment they move to stop your advances, you must cease immediately. It sounds like she was at least initially open to out-of-work conversation (as evidenced by her agreeing to switch to WhatsApp), but once she become uncomfortable it should have ended. Acceptable: You: We should go out sometime. I've never asked before, but would you be interested? Your colleague (NOT subordinate): No. You: OK, back to business. Hey, what time did they move our meeting to? Not acceptable: You: I know I ask you this daily, but... You: I'm not really supposed to date people who report to me, but... You: We went out one time and you broke it off, but... You: This was OK last week before you asked me to stop, but...
• stonecraftwolf 10y ago
  Oh God, yes, lawyer. And yes, fire him. In regards to OPs confusion about the innocent employees trepidation -- there is a reasonable fear of reprisals here. From you, from others on the team, and from the sexual harasser. Reprisals are often not easily identified -- they can be subtle and social in nature. What often happens is that the person who reports harassment is then punished because people no longer want to talk to her. They keep her out of the loop on casual stuff, but lots of professional discussions happen in casual contexts. Over time, she gets iced out for reporting illegal behavior. And then there is the fact that this person who has already shown a marked disrespect for women and a willingness to cross appropriate boundaries will know exactly why he has been fired. If you've ever been on the receiving end of a sustained campaign of abuse and harassment, that is not something to take lightly. You should do everything you can to make sure she doesn't suffer for having reported illegal behavior, and you should reassure her that you'll have her back in whatever way you can. That might mean working out with her and HR what the best way to move forward is, keeping in mind that she has every reason to think she's going to get screwed over in this process, because that's what happens the vast majority of the time. I'd say it's actually a huge vote of confidence in you that she brought this to you immediately.
  • nlh 10y ago
    > What often happens is that the person who reports harassment is then punished because people no longer want to talk to her. They keep her out of the loop on casual stuff, but lots of professional discussions happen in casual contexts. Over time, she gets iced out for reporting illegal behavior. I think this really depends on your team dynamic, and I wouldn't necessarily be concerned about this point (as valid as it is.) On my team, I know if this happened, the person who reported the harassment would be totally supported. Inappropriate advances like that are just totally not tolerated, and if anything, the team would feel MORE comfortable knowing that their teammate doesn't stand for that crap. There'd be no shunning here. But of course YMMV.
    • jasonpeacock 10y ago
      Alas, you don't know what will happen until it does happen. It could be as simple as "Wow, Joe reported Bob for sexual harassment, but Bob didn't do anything wrong - I was there. Now I have to be extra-careful around Joe to avoid getting reported myself!" And there you go - Joe is now suffering from "retaliation" and being treated special for speaking up.
• coredog64 10y ago
  99.9% with you, but I would suggest a minor change to your last sentence. Either: - Don't say anything about the departing employee - Note that his/her behavior violated company policy/policies - Give the euphemistic "X decided they weren't a good fit for our organization and is pursuing other opportunities"
• trebor 10y ago
  The only thing I would add to patio11's advice is to go back to the employee and let her know what's about to happen. If you do it without any warning, then yes she might feel that it was a breach of trust. But, if you tell her before you fire the guy you can maintain trust.
  • Karunamon 10y ago
    This. Do not make this person feel as if you did the one thing they precisely didn't want you to do. Doing so means future incidents (of any sort - people don't like to talk to betrayers) are unlikely to be reported at best. Earlier advice regarding lawyer up, for gods sakes still applies, but you now have a human obligation to the person who reported this in confidence.
  • TheCondor 10y ago
    Speak to a lawyer ASAP and then absolutely before you act speak with the victim. Both parties could potentially sue, it's not unusual to try and ignore something during the shock phase and then have a change of feelings later. Her simply wanting it to not happen again isn't quite enough. you know about it now too.. Lawyer up, you'll likely terminate the jerk and have some documents for the victim to sign
  • roasm 10y ago
    A valid reason to give to the victim is that you're not just protecting her but any other current or potential victims (using nicer language than this). That will help her feel good about coming forth with the information; she's not causing trouble for the company but actually saving someone else from harassment.
    • anotherevan 10y ago
      Yes, I really liked patio11's likening it to embezzlement, being a crime against the company (although in the case of harassment, it is a crime against both the company and the individual recipients).
• logfromblammo 10y ago
  That is not the consensus. The consensus in the grown-up business world is to protect the company. Protect the company from the sexual harassment suit, and protect the company from the wrongful termination suit. As such, no one will ever fire for cause on the basis of one incident report on a single interaction that occurred away from the workplace. But you can be certain that everyone in the building gets additional harassment training, and management/HR keeps a closer eye on all employees involved: complainants, suspects, and their direct supervisors. The company then accumulates sufficient pretext on all the involved employees to justify termination of "at will" employment for any one of them, and then waits to see if anyone will end up costing the company money before pulling the trigger. That is the consensus. It is not fair. It just saves money. As such, I would caution against looking to the consensus when deliberating on the morality or ethics.
  • tptacek 10y ago
    What "wrongful termination" suit are you referring to? Please be as specific as you can.
    • logfromblammo 10y ago
      That's the lawsuit brought by the person who gets fired, which requires the corporate lawyer to submit at least a brief and motion for dismissal, if not an actual answer to the claims. People occasionally do sue their former employers when they believe they have been wronged in some way. If you fire someone for sexual harassment when no such thing occurred, the ex-employee might sue for no other reason than to get a declaratory judgment asserting the facts of the case, as subsequent employers may be reluctant to hire, otherwise. Conflicts that cannot be resolved amicably often end up in civil court. Losing your job is an emotional experience which may result in loss of amity. That is all. I did not intend to imply that such cases had inherent merit or support of statute. You can sue anyone for any reason in civil court, and appeal to equity, which is basically complaining that something isn't fair, and that the court should do a specific thing within its power to make it less unfair. If you are ever fired, for cause or not, it would be prudent to consult with an employment law specialist so as to not waste everyone's time with a frivolous suit.
• ownagefool 10y ago
  Really? If he's _just_ hired him, I presume any probationary period would be ongoing and you can let the guy go consequence free? Thus, the most obvious least path of resistance is just to let him go and not really give him cause. I'm not from the US, thus I'm genuinely asking the question. With that said, aren't we potentially overreacting here? Quite a lot of romances spark in the office. The guys tried it on, he's been rubuked, hopefully he got the point and will settle down. If he doesn't, then I you do have a problem, but the reaction here seems to be like he's just ran over your dog.
  • Splines 10y ago
    > With that said, aren't we potentially overreacting here? Quite a lot of romances spark in the office. The guys tried it on, he's been rubuked, hopefully he got the point and will settle down. I see your point, but if you're an employee and you're sharing that "so and so texted me this <shows phone>", what's the motivation behind that? She said she doesn't want to cause problems, but if it's something between two adults and not involving work, I would imagine she would just not say anything, particularly to management. OP needs to read into their conversation, it's hard to armchair quarterback this over the internet. At the end of the day it's ultimately easier for us to say fire for a multitude of reasons, many of which are likely valid.
    • ownagefool 10y ago
      > I see your point, but if you're an employee and you're sharing that "so and so texted me this <shows phone>", what's the motivation behind that? She said she doesn't want to cause problems, but if it's something between two adults and not involving work, I would imagine she would just not say anything, particularly to management. I think you're dangerously into all women are always resonable logic there. It's entirely possible, that the female employee, as an employee of a startup, is inflected by the same hyper-sensitivity that plagues communities such as ourselves. Conversely it's also entirely possible that male employee is a complete and utter dickhead. I wouldn't bet my life on either one being the truth. > OP needs to read into their conversation, it's hard to armchair quarterback this over the internet. At the end of the day it's ultimately easier for us to say fire for a multitude of reasons, many of which are likely valid. Well yeah, the OP hasn't given us enough info to really comment and he'll need to use his own personal judgement on whether the messages were over the line or whether he was just being a guy. I'm just trying to remind people that whilst we should be professional at work, we aren't automatons and normal people are going to continue dating and bonking their colleagues or attempting to do so and whilst that's sexual, it doesn't necessarily constitute harassment.
• xutzvfgf 10y ago
  One of the first things I learned in management training was: "as soon as a manager knows about an incident, the company knows about the incident." You can't promise confidentiality because the company _must_ act on information it has. (If it does not, it opens itself up to later lawsuits for _failing_ to handle discrimination and harassment.) All of this is to say: patio11 is right.
• walrus01 10y ago
  you know the flash animation video that goes "badger badger badger badger badger"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI well, think like that, except; lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer lawyer mushroom, mushroom
• 0xdeadbeefbabe 10y ago
  Yes, but fast forward 5-10 years and we'll see Ask HN: how do I get rid of this lawyer who insists I can't do anything without his expert advice?
  • benley 10y ago
    Stop paying them? I imagine most lawyers tend to go away pretty quickly if you stop giving them money.
• vacri 10y ago
  Ah, HN. The place where people complain that companies aren't willing to invest in their employees by (re)training them, and the place where firing is demanded if people make a misstep. Embezzlement is not equatable here - embezzlement is an objective crime that attracts jail time. Flirting with someone in the office (even if clumsy) is not - there's plenty of office romances out there, and people don't go to jail for them. Yes, talking to a lawyer and documentation is the right thing to do, but damn, why does every mistake require a scalp? > As to messaging to the rest of the company, again lawyer lawyer lawyer, but "X made comments of a sexual nature to another employee. As a consequence, we fired him. If you have questions or concerns, speak to me later. Moving on." No, not moving on. If you do that and then don't then make a sexual harrassment statement part of your hiring process, then you've half-arsed it and are setting yourself up for a repeat - and next time an employee won't come to you, because they don't want to get someone fired over the issue; you've both broken an employee's trust in you and not protected yourself in future. If you're going for the hardline approach, you have to do it completely.
  • joantune 10y ago
    <insert thank you gif here> OP: if you want to build a team, scalping people for any misstep won't be a good idea, especially if you have no clear policy regarding what is proper or not.
    • owenmarshall 10y ago
      hahaha holy shit, this person thinks "calling your coworker a milf" is 'any (silly ol') misstep' and literally thinks a written HR policy is needed before you discipline them for clear sexual harassment HR COMMANDMENT XVI: thou shalt not call your coworker a milf HR COMMANDMENT XVII: thou shalt not ask your coworker to suck your d HR COMMANDMENT XVIII: thou shalt not tell others in the office "your coworker has DSLs"
• qiqing 10y ago
  Yes, +1 to this. Also, just because this one innocent employee says she "can handle it" doesn't mean that he isn't behaving like this to other employees, current or future. In order to (1) protect your other employees, and (2) set the tone for what is acceptable at your company, you need to get rid of this guy immediately.
• balls187 10y ago
  > Would you be worried about this if he had been embezzling? That would be an egregious and illegal behavior taken against the company, and the company execs should take action. However, this is a case of one adult sending inappropriate private messages to a co-worker (also an adult), but not on company time, and not using company resources.
• kls 10y ago
  I agree with the consensus that you need a lawyer to navigate you thru this, but if you fire them without their being made aware of their actions constituting harassment you are liable. Further if you do not conduct an investigation that involves all parties you are liable. I have seen more grey area cases where a complaint is filed and it comes out she is married, things went to far and now it gets walked back as harassment (usually due to a husband finding a chat log). Not saying this is what's happening here but that's the point you don't know, you have one side of the story and acting on one side of the story puts you in a bad legal position. Further harassment requires a warning that the actions are not appropriate and constitute harassment (documented) by either the individual or a supervisor and a second violation before it is actionable. This often gets construed with sexual assault which is actionable immediately. Basically the TL;DR is "get a lawyer before you do anything".
• JustTim 10y ago
  "I think the consensus in the grown-up business world is 'fire immediately for cause.'" Concurring that this is the correct answer. I make this statement from the perspective of having employees since 1979 in multiple concurrent businesses. If they have no respect at the beginning they will have less respect next week. You must choose between your business and the new guy. In a year, you will have one or neither.