3 ms·

It's a pretty weird comment though, it's hard to judge without knowing more context. Whether this is actually racism or not it's hard for me to imagine a contex

by simias 6y ago

It's a pretty weird comment though, it's hard to judge without knowing more context. Whether this is actually racism or not it's hard for me to imagine a context where such a remark would be appropriate at work. In general I think it's good advice to avoid commenting on your coworker's physical appearance unless you have a very good reason to do so. IMO it's also a bit rude for you to say that "one should seek help" when you don't really have a good understanding of the situation at hand.

PeterisP 6y ago
What I'm reading from the description of this situation (this BBC article is scant on details, previous posts had more information) is that the suggestion for medical leave came only after a prolonged, repeated escalation/appeal of a relatively minor complaint. Let's assume that the complaint was accurate, it wasn't a misunderstanding, and that there was an incident in 2019 where a colleague intentionally verbally insulted Benjamin Cruz for some reason. That's bad, but it's not a major issue, that's a single incident, Cruz did not claim that it was a pattern in their work environment, or that they had to continuously work with a colleague that kept insulting them, or something like that - their claims of abuse stop at that single incident. HR looked into the complaint and, one way or another, came to a decision which Cruz did not like. So far, it's a "meh" situation, not nice, but something that's still within bounds of an acceptable work environment no matter which side is right. Okay, a minor bad thing happened, people talked about it, hopefully people will try to be better. If it repeats, then you would have a reason for escalation or further complaints. However, if a year has passed after a single insult and a HR decision you don't agree with, and you can't let it go and keep escalating that issue because it still affects you so much that it hurts your work and causes serious personal anxiety, then that's a problematic overreaction. Letting go seems like a reasonable option, seeking mental help seems like a reasonable option, and quitting seems another reasonable option, and IMHO that's it, you should pick one of these - which was exactly what (according to Cruz) was suggested by the HR. In your opinion what should a perfect HR have suggested for Cruz to do in this situation, assuming that they have determined that some punishment to the other employee (which - in my guess - is what Cruz might have requested by asking HR to reconsider that investigation) is simply not justified? If you expect that you'll never ever have a minor personal conflict or one-off remark at your workplace, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you expect that in every dispute with a coworker the HR must take your side and you refuse to accept a judgement that's reviewed more than once, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you expect that employer will ensure that any assholes get fired after their first asshole utterance, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you can't work because these unreasonable expectations aren't met, then that's on you, not the employer; deal with it or leave.

by simias 6y ago

PeterisP 6y ago

What I'm reading from the description of this situation (this BBC article is scant on details, previous posts had more information) is that the suggestion for medical leave came only after a prolonged, repeated escalation/appeal of a relatively minor complaint. Let's assume that the complaint was accurate, it wasn't a misunderstanding, and that there was an incident in 2019 where a colleague intentionally verbally insulted Benjamin Cruz for some reason. That's bad, but it's not a major issue, that's a single incident, Cruz did not claim that it was a pattern in their work environment, or that they had to continuously work with a colleague that kept insulting them, or something like that - their claims of abuse stop at that single incident. HR looked into the complaint and, one way or another, came to a decision which Cruz did not like. So far, it's a "meh" situation, not nice, but something that's still within bounds of an acceptable work environment no matter which side is right. Okay, a minor bad thing happened, people talked about it, hopefully people will try to be better. If it repeats, then you would have a reason for escalation or further complaints. However, if a year has passed after a single insult and a HR decision you don't agree with, and you can't let it go and keep escalating that issue because it still affects you so much that it hurts your work and causes serious personal anxiety, then that's a problematic overreaction. Letting go seems like a reasonable option, seeking mental help seems like a reasonable option, and quitting seems another reasonable option, and IMHO that's it, you should pick one of these - which was exactly what (according to Cruz) was suggested by the HR. In your opinion what should a perfect HR have suggested for Cruz to do in this situation, assuming that they have determined that some punishment to the other employee (which - in my guess - is what Cruz might have requested by asking HR to reconsider that investigation) is simply not justified? If you expect that you'll never ever have a minor personal conflict or one-off remark at your workplace, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you expect that in every dispute with a coworker the HR must take your side and you refuse to accept a judgement that's reviewed more than once, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you expect that employer will ensure that any assholes get fired after their first asshole utterance, that's an unreasonable expectation. If you can't work because these unreasonable expectations aren't met, then that's on you, not the employer; deal with it or leave.