3 ms·

Most important part of the article is that the offender is a recruiter: > Jane Doe alleged that a recruitment conversation on LinkedIn took a turn for the inap

by vmarsy 9y ago

Most important part of the article is that the offender is a recruiter: > Jane Doe alleged that a recruitment conversation on LinkedIn took a turn for the inappropriate when she received sexual messages from a banker—using his corporate account—who had been trying to recruit her. One of the messages included a photograph of his genitals. So "It’s Probably Not Okay to Send Naked Pictures if you're a recruiter representing the company" would be a more accurate title, but it wouldn't be as interesting of an headline. Similarly that if you're a recruiter calling someone or having a dinner with, you shouldn't attempt to seduce* the maybe-future-employee since that's clearly an abuse of power. Lawsuit or not, that recruiter should be fired. I don't think the medium (phone company, restaurant you're at, or Linkedin) should be held responsible and Nowhere on this article it says the plaintiff is suing Linkedin, she's suing the company that recruiter works for. * For some people apparently, sending a photograph of their genitals seem to be a "seduction" technique, but even if this was more tactful flirting, this is already not ok.

mc32 9y ago
This is tangential but somewhat related. I'd like to see a day when if someone publishes something on their personal account (not official work account) whether it be social media, private conversation, etc. that those actions not affect their "life for hire" (work) life. That's the way it has been for ages (what one would say in one's private time was detached and unrelated to public time). I hope we can get there because humans are not perfect and we will always say regretful things. Things which if held to account as if representatives of a company would carry different weight. People should be able to voice their own opinion separately divorced from their "professional persona". In other words, someone from UAL when in "uniform" should conduct themselves professionally --but once they go home and don their personal attire and their personal opinion (even if negative) should not affect their professional standing. For example, flight attendant has to deal with egotistical high profile passenger --as a professional they should be able to handle things gracefully, but once they get home as a private citizen they should be able to say "I had to deal with a nasty traveler today" without the company coming down and saying "don't demean our paying customers even if they mistreat you, that is unbecoming, you are fired".

by vmarsy 9y ago

mc32 9y ago

This is tangential but somewhat related. I'd like to see a day when if someone publishes something on their personal account (not official work account) whether it be social media, private conversation, etc. that those actions not affect their "life for hire" (work) life. That's the way it has been for ages (what one would say in one's private time was detached and unrelated to public time). I hope we can get there because humans are not perfect and we will always say regretful things. Things which if held to account as if representatives of a company would carry different weight. People should be able to voice their own opinion separately divorced from their "professional persona". In other words, someone from UAL when in "uniform" should conduct themselves professionally --but once they go home and don their personal attire and their personal opinion (even if negative) should not affect their professional standing. For example, flight attendant has to deal with egotistical high profile passenger --as a professional they should be able to handle things gracefully, but once they get home as a private citizen they should be able to say "I had to deal with a nasty traveler today" without the company coming down and saying "don't demean our paying customers even if they mistreat you, that is unbecoming, you are fired".