15 ms·
Sex Scandal Toppled a Silicon Valley Chief. Investors Say, So What?
- exogeny 8y agoCan't say that I love that the article clearly takes a "Can you believe this bullshit?" tone, but it's hard to conclude anything other than that the investors here really don't care. In their view, their goal is to return capital (and by extension, further their career and life), not play judge. The investors who chose not to comment are pretty cowardly, IMO.
- vkou 8y agoThe investors should care, if not for human decency, then for their bottom line. Litigating or settling sexual harassment is very expensive - and being the cause of one is a demonstration of exceedingly poor judgement.
- saagarjha 8y agoThere is no litigation here–what are you going on about?
- detaro 8y agoFTA: > In 2012, the board settled with an executive assistant who had received sexually explicit text messages from Mr. Cagney, The New York Times previously reported. If his past conduct required settlement payments to a target of his advances, will that repeat in a new company?
- rhizome 8y agoCapital is fundamentally amoral, but that doesn't mean it has to be dehumanized. Its use can still be powered by ethics.
- toomchsauce 8y agoHe wasn’t sexually assaulting people he just dated someone at work. The article acts like if you break the workplace dating policy you should never work again or have to come crawling back. Would view this as a standard firing for him breaking the rules not really a #MeToo where he’s supposed to go into exile on MeToo island
- vkou 8y ago> He wasn’t sexually assaulting people he just dated someone at work. You can date people at work, but you cannot date people in your reporting chain. That means that if you're the CEO, you cannot date people at work. Tough shit, there's 7 billion other people in the world.
- bumholio 8y agoThat's a bullshit made-up rule, designed by corporate lawyers who want to remove any possibility of a lawsuit. There's nothing immoral about dating an employee; it's a risky situation because the employee can feel pressured and harassed, or it can lead to conflicts of interest, undeserved promotions or bonuses etc. That being said, if both persons are mature and cautious, the sky will not fall.
- cycrutchfield 8y agoWho said anything about morality? This is precisely about conflicts of interest, mismatched power dynamics, and potential abuse of authority. It is a situation that should be avoided at all costs because it can be exceedingly corrosive for an organization.
- kolbe 8y agoSo, should we also disallow any other conflicting personal relationships up the chain of command? Where do we stop? Romantic relationships? Family? Friends? All of them create the same conflicts of interest and mismatches power dynamics.
- buboard 8y agoMaybe you guys should start considering mandatory castration.
- jchw 8y ago>Mr. Cagney was romantically involved with an employee, even though he had previously told directors that he was not involved in any extramarital workplace relationships Okay...? If that's literally the extent of what they found then this is kind of a non-story. Calling it a "sex scandal" is even quite clickbaity in my opinion. Like, yes, there is a conflict of interest. Potential for abuse or coercion. But nowhere does it say any of that occurred, meaning this was just a routine violation of workplace rules. Absolutely mundane. I'm very much siding with the investors here.
- cycrutchfield 8y agoBreaking promises and lying to your board of directors is a non-story?
- rayiner 8y agoIt is on HN, where, for some inexplicable reason, people are really concerned about the idea that CEOs might have to find relationships somewhere outside their company. Lying to the board? How else was he supposed to get a date!
- jchw 8y agoI'm not defending this person at all, I don't even know who they are! I'm saying that what they're deriding this person for doesn't really justify exasperation over the fact that investors don't care. The mere act of having engaged in a relationship that would cause a conflict of interest was almost certainly handled in some form. Again, don't know this person. For all I know, they deserve to be lambasted. This article, though, falls short of making that case by a great deal.
- rustcharm 8y agoWe all agree he should have been fired. What we don't agree on is his right to work again. Many on the left say his life should be over.
- exogeny 8y ago
- rococode 8y agoI feel like this article should have quoted some lines from the earlier article (which was linked): https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/technology/sofi-chief-executive-toxic-workplace.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/technology/sofi-chief-exe... It goes into much more detail on the circumstances of Cagney leaving SoFi. The "romantically involved with an employee" phrasing in this article makes it sounds like he was just dating an employee. I think that weakens the point that's trying to be made, since many people don't equate "dating an employee" with "sex scandal". The earlier article raises additional concerns suggesting that dating one employee was not the only problem.
- yontherubicon 8y agoGood lord, what do these people want? For men who gasp have sex to not have jobs? No. Of course. That's exactly they want. Well... to not have jobs when they say.
- exogeny 8y agoI don't know about you, but when I have sex, it typically doesn't involve lying to my board, or embezzling funds.
- dang 8y agoPlease don't do this here.
- yontherubicon 8y agoSorry, the outraged "How can we let them get away with this?" tone of the article got to me a bit. I'll try to keep it civil.
- rustcharm 8y agoWhat's the alternative? Someone who did a non-criminal act that was settled should never work again? Ever?
- DoreenMichele 8y agoAs part of the investigation, Mr. Cagney’s behavior quickly came under scrutiny. At the time, he denied to board members and staff that he was in an intimate relationship at the company with anyone other than his wife, who also worked at SoFi, the people familiar with the proceedings said. Mr. Cagney reversed himself after Sullivan & Cromwell told the board there was ample evidence — in emails, hotel receipts and the manifests of private jet flights — that he had used company resources to pursue a romantic relationship with an employee, the people said. Mr. Cagney said he had previously suggested that employee as a promising candidate for chief financial officer. At Aflac, this would have been a firing offense both because he was her superior and because it was an illicit affair. I am a little weirded out that the company seems kind of okay with it being an illicit affair. The article indicates he wasn't breaking any rules at the time for seeing a subordinate. That rule was added later: SoFi also instituted an ethics policy that explicitly prohibits intimate relationships between supervisors and subordinates. I felt I had doors close in my face at Aflac due to the romantic interest of powerful men there, though none of them were breaking any rules or harming their own career. Even without getting involved, in one case just asking me out made me feel like my hopes of transferring to the same department had just died. I don't have the answers. I'm currently doing freelance work and feeling like everyone in the small town where I live is off limits romantically. Because things get tricky once you introduce that element and it can close doors that you didn't know you might want or need to go through.