5 ms·

Ding ding ding, first cogent, non-hysterical, mature comment on the page! Edit: In the spirit of trying to actually add some worthwhile content in my comment:

by rdiddly 11y ago

Ding ding ding, first cogent, non-hysterical, mature comment on the page! Edit: In the spirit of trying to actually add some worthwhile content in my comment: Harassment sucks, just like not knowing a core skill of one's job, sucks. But demanding perfection in either case is not a reasonable approach. When someone joins, and they don't meet expectations, you have to tell them they didn't meet expectations, show them the difference, let them know what the expectations are, tell or teach them what they need to know, and give them a chance to remedy it. You document this and all related conversations, in the presence of a third party if possible... usually and preferably an HR rep. If expectations are not met after this point, you are now fully able to eliminate the possibility something was inadvertent, accidental, or due to ignorance, and you have solid grounds for disciplinary action. Most times the employee will learn the lesson and it will never even reach this point. When this woman requested a big deal not be made, she was talking about the type of panicky hyper-sensitivity on this comment thread. MY PRECIOUS GENITALS!!!! Life is full of easy, simple snap-judgments when you haven't lived much of it yet. Firing someone is costly, and in more than one way. People can learn. Think of stuff you did ten years ago, that you cringe at now. You know better now. You learned.

tptacek 11y ago
Refusing to tolerate unwelcome, overt, and repeated workplace sexual advances isn't a demand for perfection; it's a demand for a minimal standard of professional conduct. It's right there on the list along with "don't steal, don't try to finagle kickbacks from suppliers, don't physically threaten employees" and so on. There are better places for bizdev and sales people to learn professionalism than in depositions.
- Frozenlock 11y ago
  You have a pretty strong opinion in this thread considering the lack of information we have. In this particular reply, all the 4 things you mentioned are NOT happening in the story. (At least by what we know.) Unwelcome: We don't know if it was unwelcome. She even agreed to move to another communication medium (one which wasn't officially work related.) Overt: It was on their own time, on a completely distinct communication medium. I don't see how more COVERT it could be. Repeated: Again, from what we know, this was on a single weekend. He called her a milf, asked if he could tell her a secret and she refused. That's it. If he's not asking again and again, it's not repeated. Workplace sexual advances: That's not in the workplace, nor on the company's time. There's not much we can conclude without knowing more.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    She reported it to the founder, presented evidence, and made it clear that the conduct was unwelcome. I'm done at "milf".
    - Frozenlock 11y ago
      The 4 things you mentioned are still false. She made it clear to the FOUNDER that the conduct was unwelcome. Did she tell it to the new employee? Did he repeatedly talk to her in the same manner after being told it was unwelcome? We don't know. I have no problem calling a coworker an "asshole", especially on my own time while taking a beer with him. Without context, that the new employee said "milf" doesn't convey anything other than he found the lady sexually attractive. His seducing techniques might be abyssal, or she might be the kind of girl that likes a little spices. Again, we don't have near enough information to make a judgement here.
      - dpweb 11y ago
        If there wasn't anything wrong with it (in her mind) - it never would have made it to the founder. What happens when you don't fire the guy? Say later on, for whatever reason, SHE has a bone to pick with the company. Now the FOUNDER is the guy who got a harrassment case and "didn't take it seriously". What's the founder's responsibility to protect his company? Don't see how he needs that risk.
        Frozenlock 11y ago
        She explicitly said that she didn't want him (the boss) to do anything about it. So (in her mind), there was nothing she couldn't handle. In addition, the event took place outside of work. You are not responsible for the social/sexual relationship of your employees in their private life.
        dragonwriter 11y ago
        She explicitly brought it to the boys, which means it is impacting the work environment. You are responsible for the work environment of your employees, including for addressing known low-leveling issues before they become higher-level issues perhaps involving other employees from the ones involved in the earlier issues. Which is why you need to consult an employment lawyer and/or your internal HR expert.
- MustardTiger 11y ago
  Where did you get repeated from? The whole point was that it is a single incident, try fixing it rather than jumping straight to firing. If it becomes repeated, then do the firing.
- Chris2048 11y ago
  The harassment of the magnitude described here is not up there with supplier kickbacks and physical violence, anymore than it is up there with embezzlement!
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Says you. Actually: the kickbacks are less likely to seriously harm your company.
    - Chris2048 11y ago
      Money accidentally miscounted at the till, and explicitly stealing money from the till might cause the business an equal loss, but both are not equally as bad.

by rdiddly 11y ago

tptacek 11y ago

Refusing to tolerate unwelcome, overt, and repeated workplace sexual advances isn't a demand for perfection; it's a demand for a minimal standard of professional conduct. It's right there on the list along with "don't steal, don't try to finagle kickbacks from suppliers, don't physically threaten employees" and so on. There are better places for bizdev and sales people to learn professionalism than in depositions.

Frozenlock 11y ago
You have a pretty strong opinion in this thread considering the lack of information we have. In this particular reply, all the 4 things you mentioned are NOT happening in the story. (At least by what we know.) Unwelcome: We don't know if it was unwelcome. She even agreed to move to another communication medium (one which wasn't officially work related.) Overt: It was on their own time, on a completely distinct communication medium. I don't see how more COVERT it could be. Repeated: Again, from what we know, this was on a single weekend. He called her a milf, asked if he could tell her a secret and she refused. That's it. If he's not asking again and again, it's not repeated. Workplace sexual advances: That's not in the workplace, nor on the company's time. There's not much we can conclude without knowing more.
- tptacek 11y ago
  She reported it to the founder, presented evidence, and made it clear that the conduct was unwelcome. I'm done at "milf".
  - Frozenlock 11y ago
    The 4 things you mentioned are still false. She made it clear to the FOUNDER that the conduct was unwelcome. Did she tell it to the new employee? Did he repeatedly talk to her in the same manner after being told it was unwelcome? We don't know. I have no problem calling a coworker an "asshole", especially on my own time while taking a beer with him. Without context, that the new employee said "milf" doesn't convey anything other than he found the lady sexually attractive. His seducing techniques might be abyssal, or she might be the kind of girl that likes a little spices. Again, we don't have near enough information to make a judgement here.
    - dpweb 11y ago
      If there wasn't anything wrong with it (in her mind) - it never would have made it to the founder. What happens when you don't fire the guy? Say later on, for whatever reason, SHE has a bone to pick with the company. Now the FOUNDER is the guy who got a harrassment case and "didn't take it seriously". What's the founder's responsibility to protect his company? Don't see how he needs that risk.
      - Frozenlock 11y ago
        She explicitly said that she didn't want him (the boss) to do anything about it. So (in her mind), there was nothing she couldn't handle. In addition, the event took place outside of work. You are not responsible for the social/sexual relationship of your employees in their private life.
        dragonwriter 11y ago
        She explicitly brought it to the boys, which means it is impacting the work environment. You are responsible for the work environment of your employees, including for addressing known low-leveling issues before they become higher-level issues perhaps involving other employees from the ones involved in the earlier issues. Which is why you need to consult an employment lawyer and/or your internal HR expert.
MustardTiger 11y ago
Where did you get repeated from? The whole point was that it is a single incident, try fixing it rather than jumping straight to firing. If it becomes repeated, then do the firing.
Chris2048 11y ago
The harassment of the magnitude described here is not up there with supplier kickbacks and physical violence, anymore than it is up there with embezzlement!
- tptacek 11y ago
  Says you. Actually: the kickbacks are less likely to seriously harm your company.
  - Chris2048 11y ago
    Money accidentally miscounted at the till, and explicitly stealing money from the till might cause the business an equal loss, but both are not equally as bad.