3 ms·
The offending interaction occurred after the interview at burning man. He did not sexually proposition anyone in the interview. Furthermore the allegations were
by Manuel_D 4y ago
The offending interaction occurred after the interview at burning man. He did not sexually proposition anyone in the interview. Furthermore the allegations were made two years after the supposed incidents occurred, the more distant an event is in our memory the more I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the possibility of people's accounts drifting from the truth.
The issue is whether Simpson was denied before or after burning man. If it was before, which is apparently what Devaul was insisting, it really was inappropriate to take any action in my opinion. If you match on tinder with someone you once interviewed, after the hire/no hurry decision is made, then your company shouldn't be treating this relationship any different from a total stranger. Or are we supposed to keep spreadsheets of every person we ever interviewed? Because that's not in my sexual harassment training, I dunno about yours.
Think about how you would defend yourself if someone accused you of making a sexual advance in an interview after you rejected them for a job? If testimony alone is enough to get you fired, then that's a significant source of pressure to give female candidates positive outcomes even if their performance isn't up to par.
- vkou 4y agoTelling someone you're poly and that they should come to burning man with you during an interview is the offending interaction. It's a fucking interview, not a date. Unless you are hiring an escort, it is not the place to discuss your sex life.
- claytongulick 4y agoYou've been given more information multiple times on this thread. There's another side to the story that's very different than your belligerent assertions. Are you interested in learning, or just cursing and throwing unsupported accusations? And no, he didn't "fess up to it" as you've said elsewhere. He admitted to an error in judgement, without going into details. I don't know specifically what he meant by that, but it's possible that he meant his error in judgement was trying to help the wrong person, in the wrong context.
- claytongulick 4y agoThis aligns with how the situation was described to me, with the exception that he was actually trying to help her get a job at Google, but she was turned down by the hiring manager (not Richard) and was unhappy about it. It was terrible timing given the other stuff that was going on with Google at the time, and he sort of got swept up in all that. I do agree with Richard's statement that he had a lapse in judgement. I think it's critically important to keep personal and professional life strictly separate, especially as an executive.