7 ms·

Many of them focus on accusations and demand justice without actually going through our "justice system". For example, >And despite the allegations against hi

Many of them focus on accusations and demand justice without actually going through our "justice system". For example, >And despite the allegations against him, Microsoft also hired her accused rapist. I don't expect any company to act on allegations other than to apply some caution, which is probably already being applied anyhow. It's clear that our police don't take rape seriously enough, but that doesn't mean that companies should start being judge, jury and executioner instead.

aero142 9y ago
>> I don't expect any company to act on allegations other than to apply some caution, which is probably already being applied anyhow. I don't agree with this. Once an accuser has filed a criminal complaint of rape, I think companies should do a lot to protect that person from a co-worker. However, once those charges are dismissed for lack of evidence, which happened for reasons not covered in this article, the situation changes. I would like someone to tell me what Microsoft should do after charges are dropped.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  Failing to address workplace sexual harassment (or any of the other potential workplace issuesthat arise from failing to act on information relating to this kind of issue between coworkers) merely because a related criminal complaint was dismissed is a good way to get into deep liability, since sexual harassment (and many of the other sources of liability which could become relevant based on a failure to act) don't require the necessary elements of the crime of rape, and as a statutory tort rather than a crime, have a lower standard of proof.
- throwaway_45 9y ago
  It said they would never be on the same teams etc. so maybe they believed her. However if I was an employer just from liability sense would just just not hire the guy. I am sure they are plenty of other good applicants. If anything does happen that is an easy multi million dollar lawsuit. In all honesty I wouldn't want to hire her either. Just stay away from any possible issues.
  - jsjohnst 9y ago
    > It said they would never be on the same teams Read further, near the end the article states that after a re-org, they ended up on the same team. As far as I’m concerned, that’s very poor form of Microsoft.
pjc50 9y ago
> judge, jury and executioner Oh come on. It wasn't even a firing decision, it was a decision on which interns to hire. They can't have been short of applicants. How about not hiring the guy with the rape allegation? Alternatively, if you believe the woman is entirely lying, why wasn't she barred from hiring? No, they just dropped the question on the floor entirely.
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  What if I allege you raped me? Should you be unemployed for life now? Due process is important. Raped women should press charges, there should be an investigation, the trial, and prison time.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    Due process is what’s required to take away someone’s liberty, not to deny a job. When my boss asks me “hey, what do you think of Jim?” I can say “we can’t hire him, he was a huge asshole to everyone in school and I think he’s untrustworthy.” I can do that, and we’ll not hire Jim, and I won’t even have to submit a notarized official statement.
    - bufferoverflow 9y ago
      You can say that, but if he finds out, you can get sued for defamation. That's why most companies, when you ask for a reference, will not say anything beyond your dates of employment and maybe the names of the projects you were working on.
      - tptacek 9y ago
        In reality, the majority of destructive rumors take the form of "Bob was impossible to work with", not "Bob sexually assaulted Avery". Meanwhile: a bogus accusation of rape is far more actionable than a bogus accusation of being an asshole; if you actually worked with Bob at all, you probably can't be sued for that at all, since things that can be construed as opinions cannot be the basis of a valid defamation claim. Unlike sexual assault, which, as a crime, is probably defamatory per se. So relative to the set of all possible destruct rumors, allegations of sexual assault stand as outliers for how uniquely protected the accused actually are.

aero142 9y ago

>> I don't expect any company to act on allegations other than to apply some caution, which is probably already being applied anyhow. I don't agree with this. Once an accuser has filed a criminal complaint of rape, I think companies should do a lot to protect that person from a co-worker. However, once those charges are dismissed for lack of evidence, which happened for reasons not covered in this article, the situation changes. I would like someone to tell me what Microsoft should do after charges are dropped.

dragonwriter 9y ago
Failing to address workplace sexual harassment (or any of the other potential workplace issuesthat arise from failing to act on information relating to this kind of issue between coworkers) merely because a related criminal complaint was dismissed is a good way to get into deep liability, since sexual harassment (and many of the other sources of liability which could become relevant based on a failure to act) don't require the necessary elements of the crime of rape, and as a statutory tort rather than a crime, have a lower standard of proof.
throwaway_45 9y ago
It said they would never be on the same teams etc. so maybe they believed her. However if I was an employer just from liability sense would just just not hire the guy. I am sure they are plenty of other good applicants. If anything does happen that is an easy multi million dollar lawsuit. In all honesty I wouldn't want to hire her either. Just stay away from any possible issues.
- jsjohnst 9y ago
  > It said they would never be on the same teams Read further, near the end the article states that after a re-org, they ended up on the same team. As far as I’m concerned, that’s very poor form of Microsoft.

pjc50 9y ago

> judge, jury and executioner Oh come on. It wasn't even a firing decision, it was a decision on which interns to hire. They can't have been short of applicants. How about not hiring the guy with the rape allegation? Alternatively, if you believe the woman is entirely lying, why wasn't she barred from hiring? No, they just dropped the question on the floor entirely.

bufferoverflow 9y ago
What if I allege you raped me? Should you be unemployed for life now? Due process is important. Raped women should press charges, there should be an investigation, the trial, and prison time.
- rayiner 9y ago
  Due process is what’s required to take away someone’s liberty, not to deny a job. When my boss asks me “hey, what do you think of Jim?” I can say “we can’t hire him, he was a huge asshole to everyone in school and I think he’s untrustworthy.” I can do that, and we’ll not hire Jim, and I won’t even have to submit a notarized official statement.
  - bufferoverflow 9y ago
    You can say that, but if he finds out, you can get sued for defamation. That's why most companies, when you ask for a reference, will not say anything beyond your dates of employment and maybe the names of the projects you were working on.
    - tptacek 9y ago
      In reality, the majority of destructive rumors take the form of "Bob was impossible to work with", not "Bob sexually assaulted Avery". Meanwhile: a bogus accusation of rape is far more actionable than a bogus accusation of being an asshole; if you actually worked with Bob at all, you probably can't be sued for that at all, since things that can be construed as opinions cannot be the basis of a valid defamation claim. Unlike sexual assault, which, as a crime, is probably defamatory per se. So relative to the set of all possible destruct rumors, allegations of sexual assault stand as outliers for how uniquely protected the accused actually are.