8 ms·

Apparently this guy is a twitter dev. Should heinous behavior like this at an after party be grounds for firing him? What would you do if you were his boss?

by DevX101 16y ago

nostromo 16y ago
I'd say yes. At a conference-related event, you still represent your company on some level. (This of course assumes that the events happened as stated.)
- rdtsc 16y ago
  As someone pointed out, this is still an allegation. If the allegation alone leads to firing, then another way to look at it is : the best way to have someone fired, is to make an allegation like that against them. Also, since the developer is still representing your company at a conference. Accusing the developer of an assault is also a good way to tarnish the company's image.
poet 16y ago
I'd fire him in a second with sufficient corroboration of the story. There's a non-negligible chance that such poor decision making isn't confined to just women.
- electromagnetic 16y ago
  With corroboration, I'd fire him in a second. You're opening your company up to a world of pain if one of your execs has a proven history of sexual assault. Furthermore, I know me personally would be looking for work elsewhere. I'm male, but I wouldn't want anything to do with someone I know has sexually assaulted a woman.
lrm242 16y ago
Better be careful about making any decisions on a blog post. That's how wrongful termination lawsuits get filed. The correct response is to talk to him, get his side of the story, wait to see if the authorities will get involved, and make a decision once more of the facts have been aired.
- bschmo 16y ago
  at-will employment in california bro
  - lrm242 16y ago
    At-will employment doesn't matter. The suit can easily be filed based on grounds that the employees future work capacity has been materially damaged because the firing gave implicit truth to the accusations, whether they be true or not. In the United States of America anyone can sue anyone for anything. Once it gets to the court, everything is open to interpretation. Thats why most legal documents are written with vague language that leaves intent and outcome up to the interpretation of the court.
    - bcarney 16y ago
      Yes, it does matter. I'd love for you to send us a link that says it doesn't matter, or cite a victorious case in California that has been "filed based on grounds that the employees future work capacity has been materially damaged because the firing gave implicit truth to the accusations" under an at-will employment.
- python777 16y ago
  It's AT-WILL in California. I don't know why the above person below me who pointed this out is getting downvoted.
  - cperciva 16y ago
    At-will employment doesn't provide a blanket exemption from wrongful termination suits. The fact that you can fire someone for no reason doesn't mean that you can fire them for a bad reason -- and if, for example, a whistle-blower is fired, there will be a strong presumption that the whistle-blowing was the cause of the firing. (Obviously this is not a whistle-blower case here, and I don't know if there would be any grounds on which to sue for wrongful termination; I'm not a California employment lawyer.)
smanek 16y ago
The article is down - but, without evidence (a conviction, confession, or eyewitnesses) I wouldn't take any action. Assuming the twitter dev contests her version of events, I see no reason to believe either one over the other. It would be stupid, and frankly sexist, to default to believing either side.
cperciva 16y ago
What would you do if you were his boss? I would show him the post and ask him to explain himself. All we have here is an unsubstantiated allegation; it happens to be an allegation I personally believe, but it's still not reasonably enough to fire someone over. If he was my employee and responded "that's all lies and I wasn't even at the pub" I'd encourage him to sue for libel. If he said "oh shit... yeah, I screwed up", I'd reconsider any important responsibilities I had assigned him (since such behaviour is evidence of not being able to act responsibly) but continue to employ him as long as he could contribute in other ways. If he said "yeah, so what's the big deal?" I'd fire him on the spot and phone the complainant to encourage her to press charges. But above all I'd wait to hear both sides of the story before passing any judgement.
- DevX101 16y ago
  Let's assume he denies this, which is a likely scenario. This puts me in a tough spot. The logician in me wants to agree with you. From her description, it was a secluded section of the bar so no one else probably saw. It would be her word against his. On the other hand, I believe her. As far as I know she has no motive to falsely claim this against him. Also important, tens of thousands will read this story and most of them will believe her too. The company may face pressure for me to act. Do I throw my employee under the bus, on the basis of my judgment of her statement? I still don't know the answer but I don't think it's clear cut either way.
  - cperciva 16y ago
    ... It would be her word against his. At that point you'd have to make a judgement call. If someone is being publicly accused of a sexual assault which he denies too place but doesn't show any interest in launching a libel suit, that makes me rather suspicious. On the other hand, if he files a libel suit, or if criminal charges are filed against him, it seems reasonable to step back and let the courts decide what happened. I'm not saying that I have a good answer for all possible situations, only that I know that I'd start by listening to both sides. The company may face pressure for me to act. Do I throw my employee under the bus, on the basis of my judgment of her statement? You're really asking two questions there. Is it reasonable to fire someone based on your judgement of what happened? Quite possibly. Is it reasonable to fire someone based on public pressure alone? I would say absolutely not -- but I come from an academic background, and I feel the greatest moments of academic history have been when universities have defended their faculty against public opinion. Most CEOs would probably throw an employee under a bus at the first hint of public pressure.
robryan 16y ago
If the story was proven to be correct I would, in an industry where it's hard enough to attract females what sort of message does it send if this guy doesn't have repercussions. Especially being at a tech related event where some females are intimidated to attend and get involved already.
mkramlich 16y ago
If I were his boss, I should have never seen his name in public, or her name in public, at this stage of matters, before the legal system has dealt with it -- assuming it does at all. It's simply nobody else's business -- or very few, anyway -- as to what exactly did or did not happen that night. Her post should never have been made publicly at this point, or, if it did, should not have explicitly named a guy. A guy who could, very possibly, be totally innocent. None of us know for sure what happened. And even if what was claimed to happen did happen, it's not at all clear to me that it was some horrible thing that deserves somebody being jailed or being punished for the rest of their life for. Sexuality and hormones are messy animalistic things -- add alcohol and it gets more messy. There's even a school of thought that could argue: no harm, no foul.
- elliottcarlson 16y ago
  > And even if what was claimed to happen did happen, it's not at all clear to me that it was some horrible thing that deserves somebody being jailed or being punished for the rest of their life for. So forcing one's hand in to or near someones underwear is acceptable behavior? It's a crime. Whether under or above clothing, it is a crime.
  - mkramlich 16y ago
    perhaps it should not be a crime. I think about things like this, and compare it to say the US-Iraq situation, one in which no US leaders have been charged with any crime, and I'm just shocked really. It feels like living in some Orwellian mad house. Perspectives and priorities are so backward. Hand in/on/near/above another person's clothes/underwear --- CRIME! ALERT THE POLICE! JAIL TIME! Invade another country on the explicit premise and justification of threat of imminent use of WMD's by that country, causing thousands of US and Iraqi deaths, which turns out there were no WMD's and the US administration appears to have spun matters and manipulated the public and Congress into getting the mandate to it -- not a crime. Oops. No big deal. A simple mistake. Oh well. It's life. Let's move on. Back to prosecuting the hands-in-panties situations! :)
    - 16y ago
leahculver 16y ago
I'd fire him. If Twitter doesn't fire him they are spoiling their pool of potential hires. Who would want to work with this guy? I bet the female employees at Twitter are already fairly creeped out by him now.
- leahculver 16y ago
  Okay, this sounds a bit harsh... so I'll explain more. As others have stated, employment in California really is at-will. For example, I know someone who has been fired for getting too drunk at a company party! So yeah, companies in California can fire you for any reason, or no reason at all. In this case I see the negative effects of keeping the person employed (such as the loss of potential employees and damage to the company reputation) outweighing their value as an employee.

Apparently this guy is a twitter dev. Should heinous behavior like this at an after party be grounds for firing him? What would you do if you were his boss?

by DevX101 16y ago

Apparently this guy is a twitter dev. Should heinous behavior like this at an after party be grounds for firing him? What would you do if you were his boss?

nostromo 16y ago

I'd say yes. At a conference-related event, you still represent your company on some level. (This of course assumes that the events happened as stated.)

rdtsc 16y ago
As someone pointed out, this is still an allegation. If the allegation alone leads to firing, then another way to look at it is : the best way to have someone fired, is to make an allegation like that against them. Also, since the developer is still representing your company at a conference. Accusing the developer of an assault is also a good way to tarnish the company's image.

poet 16y ago

I'd fire him in a second with sufficient corroboration of the story. There's a non-negligible chance that such poor decision making isn't confined to just women.

electromagnetic 16y ago
With corroboration, I'd fire him in a second. You're opening your company up to a world of pain if one of your execs has a proven history of sexual assault. Furthermore, I know me personally would be looking for work elsewhere. I'm male, but I wouldn't want anything to do with someone I know has sexually assaulted a woman.

lrm242 16y ago

Better be careful about making any decisions on a blog post. That's how wrongful termination lawsuits get filed. The correct response is to talk to him, get his side of the story, wait to see if the authorities will get involved, and make a decision once more of the facts have been aired.

bschmo 16y ago
at-will employment in california bro
- lrm242 16y ago
  At-will employment doesn't matter. The suit can easily be filed based on grounds that the employees future work capacity has been materially damaged because the firing gave implicit truth to the accusations, whether they be true or not. In the United States of America anyone can sue anyone for anything. Once it gets to the court, everything is open to interpretation. Thats why most legal documents are written with vague language that leaves intent and outcome up to the interpretation of the court.
  - bcarney 16y ago
    Yes, it does matter. I'd love for you to send us a link that says it doesn't matter, or cite a victorious case in California that has been "filed based on grounds that the employees future work capacity has been materially damaged because the firing gave implicit truth to the accusations" under an at-will employment.
python777 16y ago
It's AT-WILL in California. I don't know why the above person below me who pointed this out is getting downvoted.
- cperciva 16y ago
  At-will employment doesn't provide a blanket exemption from wrongful termination suits. The fact that you can fire someone for no reason doesn't mean that you can fire them for a bad reason -- and if, for example, a whistle-blower is fired, there will be a strong presumption that the whistle-blowing was the cause of the firing. (Obviously this is not a whistle-blower case here, and I don't know if there would be any grounds on which to sue for wrongful termination; I'm not a California employment lawyer.)

smanek 16y ago

The article is down - but, without evidence (a conviction, confession, or eyewitnesses) I wouldn't take any action. Assuming the twitter dev contests her version of events, I see no reason to believe either one over the other. It would be stupid, and frankly sexist, to default to believing either side.

cperciva 16y ago

What would you do if you were his boss? I would show him the post and ask him to explain himself. All we have here is an unsubstantiated allegation; it happens to be an allegation I personally believe, but it's still not reasonably enough to fire someone over. If he was my employee and responded "that's all lies and I wasn't even at the pub" I'd encourage him to sue for libel. If he said "oh shit... yeah, I screwed up", I'd reconsider any important responsibilities I had assigned him (since such behaviour is evidence of not being able to act responsibly) but continue to employ him as long as he could contribute in other ways. If he said "yeah, so what's the big deal?" I'd fire him on the spot and phone the complainant to encourage her to press charges. But above all I'd wait to hear both sides of the story before passing any judgement.

DevX101 16y ago
Let's assume he denies this, which is a likely scenario. This puts me in a tough spot. The logician in me wants to agree with you. From her description, it was a secluded section of the bar so no one else probably saw. It would be her word against his. On the other hand, I believe her. As far as I know she has no motive to falsely claim this against him. Also important, tens of thousands will read this story and most of them will believe her too. The company may face pressure for me to act. Do I throw my employee under the bus, on the basis of my judgment of her statement? I still don't know the answer but I don't think it's clear cut either way.
- cperciva 16y ago
  ... It would be her word against his. At that point you'd have to make a judgement call. If someone is being publicly accused of a sexual assault which he denies too place but doesn't show any interest in launching a libel suit, that makes me rather suspicious. On the other hand, if he files a libel suit, or if criminal charges are filed against him, it seems reasonable to step back and let the courts decide what happened. I'm not saying that I have a good answer for all possible situations, only that I know that I'd start by listening to both sides. The company may face pressure for me to act. Do I throw my employee under the bus, on the basis of my judgment of her statement? You're really asking two questions there. Is it reasonable to fire someone based on your judgement of what happened? Quite possibly. Is it reasonable to fire someone based on public pressure alone? I would say absolutely not -- but I come from an academic background, and I feel the greatest moments of academic history have been when universities have defended their faculty against public opinion. Most CEOs would probably throw an employee under a bus at the first hint of public pressure.

robryan 16y ago

If the story was proven to be correct I would, in an industry where it's hard enough to attract females what sort of message does it send if this guy doesn't have repercussions. Especially being at a tech related event where some females are intimidated to attend and get involved already.

mkramlich 16y ago

If I were his boss, I should have never seen his name in public, or her name in public, at this stage of matters, before the legal system has dealt with it -- assuming it does at all. It's simply nobody else's business -- or very few, anyway -- as to what exactly did or did not happen that night. Her post should never have been made publicly at this point, or, if it did, should not have explicitly named a guy. A guy who could, very possibly, be totally innocent. None of us know for sure what happened. And even if what was claimed to happen did happen, it's not at all clear to me that it was some horrible thing that deserves somebody being jailed or being punished for the rest of their life for. Sexuality and hormones are messy animalistic things -- add alcohol and it gets more messy. There's even a school of thought that could argue: no harm, no foul.

elliottcarlson 16y ago
> And even if what was claimed to happen did happen, it's not at all clear to me that it was some horrible thing that deserves somebody being jailed or being punished for the rest of their life for. So forcing one's hand in to or near someones underwear is acceptable behavior? It's a crime. Whether under or above clothing, it is a crime.
- mkramlich 16y ago
  perhaps it should not be a crime. I think about things like this, and compare it to say the US-Iraq situation, one in which no US leaders have been charged with any crime, and I'm just shocked really. It feels like living in some Orwellian mad house. Perspectives and priorities are so backward. Hand in/on/near/above another person's clothes/underwear --- CRIME! ALERT THE POLICE! JAIL TIME! Invade another country on the explicit premise and justification of threat of imminent use of WMD's by that country, causing thousands of US and Iraqi deaths, which turns out there were no WMD's and the US administration appears to have spun matters and manipulated the public and Congress into getting the mandate to it -- not a crime. Oops. No big deal. A simple mistake. Oh well. It's life. Let's move on. Back to prosecuting the hands-in-panties situations! :)
  - 16y ago

leahculver 16y ago

I'd fire him. If Twitter doesn't fire him they are spoiling their pool of potential hires. Who would want to work with this guy? I bet the female employees at Twitter are already fairly creeped out by him now.

leahculver 16y ago
Okay, this sounds a bit harsh... so I'll explain more. As others have stated, employment in California really is at-will. For example, I know someone who has been fired for getting too drunk at a company party! So yeah, companies in California can fire you for any reason, or no reason at all. In this case I see the negative effects of keeping the person employed (such as the loss of potential employees and damage to the company reputation) outweighing their value as an employee.