4 ms·
As far as I can tell, he says that the harassment wasn't harassment, and that there are two sides to every story. He does not dispute that this is the reason he
by obstinate 10y ago
As far as I can tell, he says that the harassment wasn't harassment, and that there are two sides to every story. He does not dispute that this is the reason he left Google. At least as far as I've read, please (I'm being serious) correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Yeah, if someone left a company because of a harassment complaint, I think there's a much better than even chance that they actually did harass someone. I believe that fabricated complaints comprise a very small minority of all such complaints. I would not want my employees being harassed. So there is no way I would hire someone who I knew had departed their previous company due to a harassment complaint, since that's equivalent to accepting a high likelihood that one is hiring a harasser. I might give someone a chance if they had one way back in their past and had otherwise apparently cleaned up their act/showed contrition.
> That makes you a larger coward
Sorry, not clear on how it makes me cowardly to put the safety and security of my employees before the interests of likely harassers seeking a job at my company.
> make them wear a scarlet letter on their chest . . .
You seem a lot more concerned for the harassers' well-being than the people being harassed. I don't share this ordering of priorities with you.
- jimmywanger 10y ago> You seem a lot more concerned for the harassers' well-being than the people being harassed. The main, and most important point. Nothing has been proven. An unsubstantiated, unrelated leak has gone out and you're already assuming that something bad has occurred. If you replace "harasser" with "communist", you get the McCarthy trials. If you replace "harasser" with "witch" you go all the way back to Salem. You should share the ordering of priorities that you're innocent until proven guilty. > As far as I can tell, he says that the harassment wasn't harassment You're already making a value judgement here. He completely denies that anything untoward happened. > Yeah, if someone left a company because of a harassment complaint He also said that he left on his own free will, and Google threw him a retirement/departure party. > Sorry, not clear on how it makes me cowardly By dropping somebody who hasn't been proven to do anything wrong at another job because it looks bad for PR means you're a coward. Being swayed by public opinion on unsubstantiated charges makes you a coward, instead of standing up for your own employees.
- moopling 10y agoThe key difference here is in the probabilities. For every witch or communist accused, approximately none were actually witches or communists. That is simply not true for harrassers, for instance the estimated false accusation rate among rapists is around 5%[1]. Generally people have no motivation to report what is not true, reporting sexual assault of any form can be a long and tiring process, and often carries a lot of stigma with it if anything gets out... It shouldn't be so damaging to victims, but it often is. As such in these cases it is probably best to place burden of proof on the accused not the victim. I mean, everyone does this all the time anyway. When was the last time you thought someone was guilty of something (speaking about you behind your back for instance) and you waited until they were proved guilty until you changed you behavior towards them? Innocent until proven guilty is for the courts only, people should and do act on reasonable evidence. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape