4 ms·
> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got.
by mikehearn 13y ago
> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well.
The HR person has been on the job for a minimum of 31 business days and a maximum of 53. Horvath joined two years ago. Unless you are a GitHub insider, you currently are working off knowledge from a single source in which the information was provided by a person with a specific agenda. It is malicious to call for the HR person's job given your almost complete dearth of information.
- macspoofing 13y agoIt looks like HR was involved in this case and the issue with the wife seemed have been raised. That should have been an immediate red flag to this "experienced" individual before they even got down to business of addressing any other concerns. It was a major screw-up.
- mikehearn 13y agoPrecisely, it "looks like" HR was involved. Can you say with certainty this person, hired in Jan. 2014, was involved? And can you say with certainty that this person could have prevented this? Again, unless you're a GitHub insider (are you?), the answer is no. At the moment, no one on HN knows anything. It's entirely possible this was an HR issue, but specifically calling for the HR person to be suspended or fired, given our collective total ignorance, is a spiteful and bizarre declaration directed at someone the original poster does not know. These are real people, and HN comments – particularly top comments – can influence decisions.