5 ms·

Yes, this is a woman who entered a relationship and it didnt work out. Ive definitely read it and this is not a #metoo story. He didnt force himself up on, he

by ProAm 7y ago

Yes, this is a woman who entered a relationship and it didnt work out. Ive definitely read it and this is not a #metoo story. He didnt force himself up on, he didnt take advantage of her, he didnt threaten her, he didnt demand she date him, it's about dating someone at work when there are clear rules around it. No one said she had to leave the department, but that one of them would have to leave. It's a tragically sad story, especially for the child, but this was two consenting adults in an adult relationship that was full of bad choices.

jacquesm 7y ago
Well, then maybe you read the story but did not understand it. That's fine with me, but I did read the story and that is not my takeaway at all. For starters, there is a clear abuse of power here with one party being the senior person at the company suggesting that things will be 'ok' when clearly there was a plan all along to create a situation of asymmetry and dependency, followed up with a lot of very mean and manipulative action. Besides using the child as leverage against the mother there is a clear - and continuous - act in the self interest of the dominant party, more wealthy, still employed and willing to use every dirty tactic in the book and a couple I'd never even seen before against the other. Utterly revolting and not simply 'two consenting adults in an adult relationship full of bad choices'. That's victim blaming at its worst.
- ProAm 7y ago
  An abuse of power? They had an affair, how was that a plan to create a situation of asymmetry and dependency? How did she not know this was a bad idea all along? Did she think a person willing to cheat on a spouse was going to be a good person down the road? > David and I began an affair shortly after that night and we were together for years. She made a bad choice in life. She had an affair with a married man that worked in her department, when she knew such a relationship was against company policy. No one said she had to leave the department, only that one of them had to. Everything that happened after, while terribly cruel, is not anything you dont see frequently when a relationship falls apart that involves children. It's very sad story but I am not victim blaming anyone, they are both at fault. But they both willingly went into this situation with their eyes open knowing full well what the consequences could be.
- hackinthebochs 7y ago
  I don't get this "abuse of power" angle at all. Having a relationship with a subordinate is not an abuse of power. Insisting that your job rests on a relationship is an abuse of power, but without evidence that happened (and it seems like it didnt), there's no abuse. This idea that a power differential invalidates a relationship is nonsense. The fact is, people spend half or more of their waking hours at work. You spend more time with your colleagues than you do your own family in many cases. Relationship are going to happen. We need to learn how to deal with it rather than try to codify rules against it.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    The abuse of power is that he maneuvered her into a position of dependency, then bailed out and used the fact that she was now dependent on him against her.
    - hackinthebochs 7y ago
      Maneuvered implies intent. How do you know that was his intention from the start?
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        Well, it certainly didn't happen by accident. Fathers should support their kids, period.
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    "One of us needs to leave. If you leave, I'll take care of you financially, since I'm making far more money here". "Oh, you left, thanks. Oh, that financial help? I changed my mind about that". It's possible to be abusive in a myriad of ways.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    > This idea that a power differential invalidates a relationship is nonsense. Why? Seems pretty sound to me.
elliekelly 7y ago
Do you think he got the same phone call saying one of them had to leave?
unapologetic 7y ago
This situation is fucked up on multiple levels. You don't punish the subordinate. Given his level, he should have been out. Instead they transferred her from legal to sales and her performance tanked because it was a job she was in no way qualified to do. He got her to quit (and sign a bunch of forms) promising to support her, then bailed. He refused child support and after she sued, he started using threats against her kid to fuck with her. This is a woman who got into a relationship, then realized that not only was the guy a complete psycho but the company had his back because he's the important one. The rot at google is very real. Top down too.
- ProAm 7y ago
  He did not get her to quit, she made that choice herself because she wanted to protect him. She made that choice. Yes he is a terrible person, yes possibly psycho and this story sucks but no one forced anything. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
  - lanstin 7y ago
    Is rape the only thing that companies should fire people for? A pattern of relationships like this is quite likely to be very bad for Google, both in terms of settlements and in terms of lost morale and acceptance of shitty behavior instead of working together on the great common project. The question isn't "forced" it's "why is firing the subordinate done instead of firing the habitual asshole when it's clearly in the companies interests to fire the habitual asshole." And the answer to that question makes it plausible that Google has been protecting bad people at the cost of their idealistic but achievable missions. Also, she may have made that choice, but also he "got" her to quit - not sure if you've been in a relationship, but both things can be true. Someone can influence you to make a bad choice. The responsibility for that bad choice then exists in both people.
    - ProAm 7y ago
      She wasnt fired. And she quit on her own volition. I can't speak to a pattern of bad behavior because I just dont know more than this story and the one she posted about. He absolutely sounds like human garbage, but her story isn't a #metoo story. There was no abuse, no abuse of power, no forcing anything. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him.

by ProAm 7y ago

jacquesm 7y ago

Well, then maybe you read the story but did not understand it. That's fine with me, but I did read the story and that is not my takeaway at all. For starters, there is a clear abuse of power here with one party being the senior person at the company suggesting that things will be 'ok' when clearly there was a plan all along to create a situation of asymmetry and dependency, followed up with a lot of very mean and manipulative action. Besides using the child as leverage against the mother there is a clear - and continuous - act in the self interest of the dominant party, more wealthy, still employed and willing to use every dirty tactic in the book and a couple I'd never even seen before against the other. Utterly revolting and not simply 'two consenting adults in an adult relationship full of bad choices'. That's victim blaming at its worst.

ProAm 7y ago
An abuse of power? They had an affair, how was that a plan to create a situation of asymmetry and dependency? How did she not know this was a bad idea all along? Did she think a person willing to cheat on a spouse was going to be a good person down the road? > David and I began an affair shortly after that night and we were together for years. She made a bad choice in life. She had an affair with a married man that worked in her department, when she knew such a relationship was against company policy. No one said she had to leave the department, only that one of them had to. Everything that happened after, while terribly cruel, is not anything you dont see frequently when a relationship falls apart that involves children. It's very sad story but I am not victim blaming anyone, they are both at fault. But they both willingly went into this situation with their eyes open knowing full well what the consequences could be.
hackinthebochs 7y ago
I don't get this "abuse of power" angle at all. Having a relationship with a subordinate is not an abuse of power. Insisting that your job rests on a relationship is an abuse of power, but without evidence that happened (and it seems like it didnt), there's no abuse. This idea that a power differential invalidates a relationship is nonsense. The fact is, people spend half or more of their waking hours at work. You spend more time with your colleagues than you do your own family in many cases. Relationship are going to happen. We need to learn how to deal with it rather than try to codify rules against it.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  The abuse of power is that he maneuvered her into a position of dependency, then bailed out and used the fact that she was now dependent on him against her.
  - hackinthebochs 7y ago
    Maneuvered implies intent. How do you know that was his intention from the start?
    - jacquesm 7y ago
      Well, it certainly didn't happen by accident. Fathers should support their kids, period.
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  "One of us needs to leave. If you leave, I'll take care of you financially, since I'm making far more money here". "Oh, you left, thanks. Oh, that financial help? I changed my mind about that". It's possible to be abusive in a myriad of ways.
- rayiner 7y ago
  > This idea that a power differential invalidates a relationship is nonsense. Why? Seems pretty sound to me.

elliekelly 7y ago

Do you think he got the same phone call saying one of them had to leave?

unapologetic 7y ago

This situation is fucked up on multiple levels. You don't punish the subordinate. Given his level, he should have been out. Instead they transferred her from legal to sales and her performance tanked because it was a job she was in no way qualified to do. He got her to quit (and sign a bunch of forms) promising to support her, then bailed. He refused child support and after she sued, he started using threats against her kid to fuck with her. This is a woman who got into a relationship, then realized that not only was the guy a complete psycho but the company had his back because he's the important one. The rot at google is very real. Top down too.

ProAm 7y ago
He did not get her to quit, she made that choice herself because she wanted to protect him. She made that choice. Yes he is a terrible person, yes possibly psycho and this story sucks but no one forced anything. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
- lanstin 7y ago
  Is rape the only thing that companies should fire people for? A pattern of relationships like this is quite likely to be very bad for Google, both in terms of settlements and in terms of lost morale and acceptance of shitty behavior instead of working together on the great common project. The question isn't "forced" it's "why is firing the subordinate done instead of firing the habitual asshole when it's clearly in the companies interests to fire the habitual asshole." And the answer to that question makes it plausible that Google has been protecting bad people at the cost of their idealistic but achievable missions. Also, she may have made that choice, but also he "got" her to quit - not sure if you've been in a relationship, but both things can be true. Someone can influence you to make a bad choice. The responsibility for that bad choice then exists in both people.
  - ProAm 7y ago
    She wasnt fired. And she quit on her own volition. I can't speak to a pattern of bad behavior because I just dont know more than this story and the one she posted about. He absolutely sounds like human garbage, but her story isn't a #metoo story. There was no abuse, no abuse of power, no forcing anything. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him.