3 ms·

>call her in for a meeting A meeting? Like a disciplinary hearing? >the ICR’s independent investigation deemed some of the allegations serious enough to warra

>call her in for a meeting A meeting? Like a disciplinary hearing? >the ICR’s independent investigation deemed some of the allegations serious enough to warrant consideration at a disciplinary hearing”. However, Rahman resigned and the disciplinary hearing did not take place.

arghwhat 8y ago
> Like a disciplinary hearing? No, a face to face meeting between adults. Not hiring lawyers to do background research and pulling her in in front of a committee. Like you would in case of such a situation in a normal company. Once you pull an "independent investigation", you're far beyond taking things like adults anymore. I wouldn't want to work at a place where I get inspected like that. She might have been an asshole, but this is a childish way of dealing with things, and at the cost of bloody humanity.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  Why do you assume a face-to-face meeting wasn't tried? The exact details are confidential, for the protection of both accused and accusers. Neither one of us knows what really happened. But I can say from experience that someone who is habitually a jerk to their subordinates is not likely to change their habits when called out face-to-face by the same subordinates. They're likely to react with the same hostile dismissiveness that they normally use. This is not just about saving someone's tender feelings. People with a hostile supervisor are afraid to ask questions and afraid to take risks, and the quality of their work suffers. Bullying your subordinates is irresponsible management and should be treated as such.
  - arghwhat 8y ago
    I assume that she was not called in by her superiors due to an "independent investigation" being started. There would never be a need for such thing. If her superior receives complaints from her employees about her, then they already know that she has problems. In management and human psychology, evidence does not matter—if her employees are all dissatisfied with her, then that is all you need to know. They can then either correct her or fire her. The presence of an "independent investigation" seems to look like someone didn't want to deal with the situation, and instead have an external party be responsible for it. That is irresponsible management from her superiors. Now, again, she might have been a prick worth firing, but I certainly do not find this response to be sensible, nor is her resignation proof of anything as any sensible person would quit a workplace that runs "investigations" against them (just like you are likely to quit a place where your boss is a bully).

arghwhat 8y ago

> Like a disciplinary hearing? No, a face to face meeting between adults. Not hiring lawyers to do background research and pulling her in in front of a committee. Like you would in case of such a situation in a normal company. Once you pull an "independent investigation", you're far beyond taking things like adults anymore. I wouldn't want to work at a place where I get inspected like that. She might have been an asshole, but this is a childish way of dealing with things, and at the cost of bloody humanity.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago
Why do you assume a face-to-face meeting wasn't tried? The exact details are confidential, for the protection of both accused and accusers. Neither one of us knows what really happened. But I can say from experience that someone who is habitually a jerk to their subordinates is not likely to change their habits when called out face-to-face by the same subordinates. They're likely to react with the same hostile dismissiveness that they normally use. This is not just about saving someone's tender feelings. People with a hostile supervisor are afraid to ask questions and afraid to take risks, and the quality of their work suffers. Bullying your subordinates is irresponsible management and should be treated as such.
- arghwhat 8y ago
  I assume that she was not called in by her superiors due to an "independent investigation" being started. There would never be a need for such thing. If her superior receives complaints from her employees about her, then they already know that she has problems. In management and human psychology, evidence does not matter—if her employees are all dissatisfied with her, then that is all you need to know. They can then either correct her or fire her. The presence of an "independent investigation" seems to look like someone didn't want to deal with the situation, and instead have an external party be responsible for it. That is irresponsible management from her superiors. Now, again, she might have been a prick worth firing, but I certainly do not find this response to be sensible, nor is her resignation proof of anything as any sensible person would quit a workplace that runs "investigations" against them (just like you are likely to quit a place where your boss is a bully).