4 ms·

harassment is a pretty strong word in my opinion, so I hope she proceeds with blogging as to what constituted that harassment and why she endured it for so long

by vladgur 13y ago

harassment is a pretty strong word in my opinion, so I hope she proceeds with blogging as to what constituted that harassment and why she endured it for so long. On other hand if she was so bad as the Secret screenshot claims, why wasnt she fired. Of course this whole incident could be a result of a slow firing process where the employer has to collect enough documentation in order to protect itself from any discrimination lawsuit. Of course truth be told we simply may never find out what really happened since each party will try to protect its image.

helpful 13y ago
CA is an at-will employment state. She can be let go without a reason and it would be insanely difficult to prove discrimination occurred as a result
Giraffenstein 13y ago
>each party will try to protect its image. Horvath isn't so much protecting her image as she is heaping dirt upon it. She's allegedly harassed in the workplace, and the first place she goes to is Twitter? Nowhere in the flowchart of "how to deal with workplace issues" will you find a square that says "whine on Twitter." "Blog about it" is also conspicuously absent.
- dalke 13y ago
  Flowcharts are only guides, not requirements. The law is very clear. Complaints about harassment are not constrained to only a specific set of actions. Quoting from http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/retal.html http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/retal.html : A complaint or protest about alleged employment discrimination to a manager, union official, co-worker, company EEO official, attorney, newspaper reporter, Congressperson, or anyone else constitutes opposition. ... A complaint about an employment practice constitutes protected opposition only if the individual explicitly or implicitly communicates a belief that the practice constitutes unlawful employment discrimination\13. Because individuals often may not know the specific requirements of the anti-discrimination laws enforced by the EEOC, they may make broad or ambiguous complaints of unfair treatment. Such a protest is protected opposition if the complaint would reasonably have been interpreted as opposition to employment discrimination. "Whine on Twitter" and "Blog about it" are examples of "a complaint or protest .. [to] anyone else", and so constitutes opposition. If "harassment" here was meant to imply discriminatory treatment on the basis of sex - which seems to be the general consensus of this thread - then it would easily fall under "broad or ambiguous complaints of unfair treatment." You can make up whatever ideas you want on what someone should or shouldn't do, but if you read the actual court cases you'll find that your views would protect workplaces with illegal discriminatory practices, including workplaces which actively support sexual harassment.

by vladgur 13y ago

helpful 13y ago

CA is an at-will employment state. She can be let go without a reason and it would be insanely difficult to prove discrimination occurred as a result

Giraffenstein 13y ago

>each party will try to protect its image. Horvath isn't so much protecting her image as she is heaping dirt upon it. She's allegedly harassed in the workplace, and the first place she goes to is Twitter? Nowhere in the flowchart of "how to deal with workplace issues" will you find a square that says "whine on Twitter." "Blog about it" is also conspicuously absent.

dalke 13y ago
Flowcharts are only guides, not requirements. The law is very clear. Complaints about harassment are not constrained to only a specific set of actions. Quoting from http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/retal.html http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/retal.html : A complaint or protest about alleged employment discrimination to a manager, union official, co-worker, company EEO official, attorney, newspaper reporter, Congressperson, or anyone else constitutes opposition. ... A complaint about an employment practice constitutes protected opposition only if the individual explicitly or implicitly communicates a belief that the practice constitutes unlawful employment discrimination\13. Because individuals often may not know the specific requirements of the anti-discrimination laws enforced by the EEOC, they may make broad or ambiguous complaints of unfair treatment. Such a protest is protected opposition if the complaint would reasonably have been interpreted as opposition to employment discrimination. "Whine on Twitter" and "Blog about it" are examples of "a complaint or protest .. [to] anyone else", and so constitutes opposition. If "harassment" here was meant to imply discriminatory treatment on the basis of sex - which seems to be the general consensus of this thread - then it would easily fall under "broad or ambiguous complaints of unfair treatment." You can make up whatever ideas you want on what someone should or shouldn't do, but if you read the actual court cases you'll find that your views would protect workplaces with illegal discriminatory practices, including workplaces which actively support sexual harassment.