16 ms·

Ellen Pao Owns the Room

215 points by MilnerRoute 12y ago

simplemath 12y ago
Don't shit where you eat.
- spinlock 12y ago
  It's disappointing that this comment is getting downvoted. This case would be so much simpler if Pao had started talking about needing HR policies before she had an affair with a married co-worker.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Definitely. If only she had done things a little differently, she could have prevented her associates from having to discriminate against her for not continuing to date them.
    - hawkice 12y ago
      There is something to be said about how, if the patterns of discrimination were a more straight-forward story, it would be better for Pao. The issues around that one partner post-relationship seem to be only one part of much larger problem (assuming the allegations are even roughly true), but "having an affair with a married coworker" is the type of thing that people really get sidetracked on. The case could stand on its own without those events -- I think it's within good decency to point out the danger/distraction of these lateral issues.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - spinlock 12y ago
      Yes. This is why professionals don't date coworkers (married or otherwise).
      - andywood 12y ago
        Professionals do in fact date coworkers. It happens all the time - it's a matter of culture. Spend some time at Microsoft, for example. "Microsoft Married" is in the corporate slang lexicon on the intranet.
        wyclif 12y ago
        He's implying that if you do date coworkers at the office it's unprofessional, not that people in a professional capacity don't make bad decisions and put their career at risk by dating coworkers.
        tptacek 12y ago
        Of course, what he's managing to imply is that women should not date men at their offices. Because it victimizes the men, who are forced to retaliate when the relationship ends, and then they look bad in the press.
        spinlock 12y ago
        Could you be more paternalistic? We're talking about a woman who was a partner at one of the best VC firms in the world. Pointing our her unprofessional behavior implies nothing more than that _she_ should have known better. If you really want to be a white knight, stop treating women at the top of the industry like interns.
        tptacek 12y ago
        "White knight" is definitely a term that makes me sit up and take notice that maybe it's me that might be on the worst possible side of a debate.
  - huu 12y ago
    Interpreting your comment charitably, you are exactly right that it would be simpler had this been the case. Another fact: it would also be simpler had she not been (allegedly) lied to about the marriage status of the co-worker.
    - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
      You have to wonder about the ethics of someone who - by this account - was willing to tell obvious stupid lies about his marital status to get a few shags. If all of this is true, and it was the ethical baseline for co-worker relationships, what's the ethical baseline for client relationships?
      - sigzero 12y ago
        Why didn't she ask someone to verify. Sounds very shady to me. She knew he was married. I don't believe a lot of what she is saying now. Some but not all.
    - spinlock 12y ago
      "married" was only one word in my comment. Replace it with "recently separated" or even "single" and it still equals incredibly inappropriate conduct. the reason you don't dip your pen in the company ink is that it gets messy.
      - huu 12y ago
        I don't think we disagree. If it's valid to point out she shouldn't have been engaging in any kind of relationship with a co-worker, then it's equally valid to point out the same thing for the co-worker.
  - jsprogrammer 12y ago
    According to her testimony (according to this article), the person whom she had the affair with made False Statements regarding his marital status.
    - sigzero 12y ago
      They worked together. I find zero credibility in that statement.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - olefoo 12y ago
        If someone you worked with were intentionally deceptive about the status of their romantic relationships how long would it take you to find out? Most people keep their work and personal lives somewhat separate for a reason.
  - bmm6o 12y ago
    The case would also have been simpler if KPC was run like a real company that understood that it can be found liable for the discriminatory actions of its employees and the atmosphere that follows.
    - spinlock 12y ago
      Absolutely. I imagine this hypothetical company would have fired both parties who ingaged in an affair that caused friction at the office. My point was that Pao seems a day late and a dollar short by pursuing an HR solution after, rather than instead of, having an affair with a collegue.
- scott_karana 12y ago
  If you're talking about having relationships with semi-married coworkers: generally yes, you're right. However, I don't think your phrase applies to anything else about this case, hence the downvotes if people interpreted it differently than me... :)
TheMagicHorsey 12y ago
I know this is just one side of the story ... but if these facts are even remotely true, Kleiner is really a terrible place for women. This married dude just harassing co-workers left and right. How gross. Not inviting women partners to events. WTF? Who are these guys? Is this 2015? This guys webpage is almost a bigger crime than his alleged sexual misbehavior: http://www.ajitnazre.com/ http://www.ajitnazre.com/
- exstudent2 12y ago
  It is creepy but it IS just one side of the story. It seems premature to condem then until hearing all the info.
  - trose 12y ago
    Well Lane did confirm his silly anecdote about his ex wife. That was a very inappropriate response to an employee reaching out to him about sexual harassment. He should have hired an HR consultant immediately. Additionally Nazre has a history of sexually harassing female coworkers so at this point it's looking pretty cut and dry.
- mullen 12y ago
  > This married dude just harassing co-workers left and right. How gross. I am little surprised that a VC is not firing people for doing this. Just strikes me as a huge liability and a great way to drive talent out of the shop.
  - quaunaut 12y ago
    Apparently he was fired, but not for his conduct with Pao, but for sexually harassing another female partner.
    - cbsmith 12y ago
      The ol' "once is an accident, twice is a pattern" principle.
peteretep 12y ago
> the firm was not fastidious about certain key aspects of > HR and employment policy HR is an expensive luxury, until it's not, and your dirty laundry is all over TechCrunch. c.f. Github.
- frandroid 12y ago
  Yeah, because KPC, that poor startup, really couldn't afford proper HR. :P
  - peteretep 12y ago
    Costs aren't always in straight dollars. Many people would consider HR to have a bureaucracy and agility cost far beyond the amount it costs to hire an HR staffer.
    - MattHeard 12y ago
      Sexual harassment investigations interrupting business?! We don't have time for that! /s
      - ugh123 12y ago
        Or just stop hiring assholes
        shiven 12y ago
        If only LinkedIn had a radiobutton for that, or show an option to 'endorse' someone as an asshole... But, seriously, how do you, or anyone, actually do it? Humans are NP-hard in that regard. You will most likely only know a potato is hot once you are holding it in your hand. By then, it's already too late.
        jheriko 12y ago
        why not? i wish facebook had a 'dislike' button too, and twitter a public ignore count with how many people chose to ignore a stream... you can't learn with only positive feedback (assuming your brain is mostly neural network) we need the negative too. its a shame our current society is so stuck on protecting people from criticism...
lifeisstillgood 12y ago
One quote stands out for me - "we're a small partnership". Now it could be bad transcription by TC but that shows even after sueing them, Pao still thinks of Kleiner as part of her. It's hard to fake. I feel sorry for her - she has a huge uphill slog ahead of her, and even if she wins, her career is start on her own or move to growing oranges. I look forward to hearing Pao associates making investments in female founded businesses using money raised from female only investors. Probably the only way to get taken seriously.
- frandroid 12y ago
  Ahem... She's currently the interim CEO at Reddit. Good point on the "we" though.
- victorhooi 12y ago
  Not to take away from the merits of her case at all (which is still to be decided), but she is probably not hurting for money. She was earning what, $500,000 (i.e. half a million) a year at Kleiner? The USD 16 million she's seeking in damages is for lost income (apparently she could have earned up to $3 million a year if she got promoted at Kleiner). Not to mention her current husband is Alphonse 'Buddy' Fletcher Jr, an ex-hedge fund manager, who also sued his former employee in a $1.3 million lawsuit for discrimination. (Ironically, he's also been sued himself by two guys for sexual harassment, and apparently lost, but that was settled privately, so we don't know how much that was for). Either way, neither Pao nor her husband are hurting for cash. All the players on both sides are probably living in some stratospheric world that ordinary Joes like you and I probably can't even fathom.
  - lifeisstillgood 12y ago
    It really isn't the point. Yes she earns multiples more than me, but on the partner track at kleiner she would expect to make millions. Chucking her out because she is a woman (or gay or not white or whatever) is an offence. We punish offences because that is what a fair society does. Even if the victim is not sympathetic or "one of us". In fact the last reason is the reason we have these laws - to defend people who are not one of us. Plus it is good to remind everyone once in a while that the law is in charge, not money, not anti-terrorism sentiment, not administrations. The law. It takes a battering, so it needs the occasional public win.
guelo 12y ago
Who are these people? Why do they get all the money from wall street and then get to go around acting like they're gods? A monkey could have done a good job of throwing money around Sillicon Valley and picking a bunch of winners over the last 10 years. Why hire these prima donnas to do it? Wall Street is a corrupt joke.
- quaunaut 12y ago
  A lot of the money from these investors didn't come from Wall St., but from past successful Silicon Valley tech companies.
  - chetanahuja 12y ago
    Well actually the main sources of venture funds are similar to where wall-street goes for it's investment funds. Institutions (pension funds, state and national level reserve funds etc), wealthy individuals, cash reserves from large companies etc.
- desireco42 12y ago
  Beautifully said :)
- neindanke 12y ago
  > Who are these people? Ellen Pao, Harvard MBA. Job history was corporate attorney, other non-technical jobs. Ajit Nazre, Michigan Tech PHD. Job history unclear. Google hits on him mostly indicate a skeezy character. If the BI article is credible, most startups including the ones in India have dropped him like a rock after the lawsuit came out. > Why do they get all the money? Good question. Most engineers fail to realize how critical all of them are. They fail to demand fair compensation for their time. Instead they treat pats-on-the-back, a beer bust, maybe a gifted $10 ticket to see a scifi movie as major rewards while their management takes the bulk of the compensation pie.
  - cowsandmilk 12y ago
    Ajit Nazre does not have a PhD from Michigan Tech, only a Masters. He has a PhD from Technische Universität Hannover and an MBA from Harvard. Ellen Pao has a JD from Harvard Law School in addition to her MBA.
tptacek 12y ago
She said that Lane [her and Nazre's supervisor] had responded not with action on the HR front, but by telling the story of how he had met his second wife while they were both working at Oracle. He had been married to his first wife at the time. Lane said that he had gone on to have a wonderful life with his former colleague — and that, perhaps, Pao could have that with Nazre. But, Pao said, Lane added that she and Nazre likely wouldn’t be able to work together. When Lane became involved with his current wife at Oracle, his wife had to quit. Pao said this implied that Lane was suggesting that she would have to leave Kleiner, too. “Did you tell Mr. Lane that you were interested in having a serious relationship with Mr. Nazre?” Lawless asked. “Absolutely not,” Pao said. Lane then suggested that she and Nazre have a one-on-one lunch to try and figure out how to work things out. (For his part, Lane said in his testimony last week that he only relayed this story to show how he understood how complicated workplace relationships could be.) This is vivid, credible, and damning, given that the anecdote about Lane's wife is, after his own testimony, an established fact of the case, as is apparently Pao's unwillingness to continue a personal relationship with Nazre, which is documented in emails. There are galactic-scale legal resources allocated to both sides of this controversy, so who knows where this will go next. But in the annals of "how not to respond to a personnel concern", this has to be right up there.
- darkerside 12y ago
  Knowing they were in the midst of an on-again off-again relationship, Lane may have had a reasonable assumption that there was still an intention to continue the relationship, without Pao explicitly stating that she was interested in a serious relationship. At this point, the fewer conclusions we all jump to the better.
  - scott_karana 12y ago
    If someone in a relationship goes to their corporate HR manager for relationship assistance, I don't think your assumption is reasonable at all! If they were a marriage counselor, or a close friend, sure, but somehow I think nobody willing to salvage a personal relationship is going to bring it to their office's attention for assistance...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- foobarqux 12y ago
  Pao was making $560k all in. Part of the complaint is that she thought she deserved to be senior partner, where she would have made $3 million. http://www.highly.co/hl/54ff8b476c696c0322060000 http://www.highly.co/hl/54ff8b476c696c0322060000
jakejake 12y ago
“It was said that if there were women there, that the conversation would be tempered, and it was because women kill the buzz” What alternate planet are these guys living on? A mixed crowd is always more interesting in my book, that goes for personal and professional get-togethers.
- r00fus 12y ago
  I've been in meetings and cultures years before where your attitude (which I share) was not the prevailing atmosphere. In those places, I could imagine women feeling like a hen in a fox's den.
- rodgerd 12y ago
  "Yeah, we're going to talk about how to do business successfully, but we don't want to include any women because our success doesn't depend in any way on half the planet."
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- ripb 12y ago
  Fuck this site
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  FWIW women too like single sex gatherings. Source: work in hospitality and get request for "no male servers" or specific female hosts. It seems in the OP that it's a social gathering??
  - 12y ago
conorh 12y ago
Admittedly I'm not unbiased, having done work for KPCB (although I know nothing about this case). However, I am extremely disappointed reading the comments in this thread and in the media. People seem ready to jump to conclusions and crucify having only heard one side of the story, I suppose that makes for great stories in the media, but why not let the court case play out and hear both sides first?
- ripb 12y ago
  Fuck this site
- vasilipupkin 12y ago
  that certainly seems sensible on the surface, but I have to say, even if every single thing Pao said is made up, the fact that they held an dinner party with Vice President of the United States as the guest of honor and did not invite a single female partner is pretty hard to explain in any sort of reasonable fashion
  - conorh 12y ago
    Aha, see here you have extrapolated from the framing in the media headlines (and the plaintiff), without actually looking at any context. So to look at what you just said and present it differently: (note: I'm not coming down on either side of this, just presenting the other side, see [1]) 1. He was not the Vice President of the United States then. He is (and was then) a KPCB partner. 2. He was not the guest of honor, this was a dinner party at his apartment for the 10 people that could fit. Apparently he is fond of hosting dinners there and does many of them. At this event there were only two KPCB partners. Is it a stretch to imagine that two out of all the partners at KPCB for this particular dinner might not include a female partner? Also in Chien's testimony [2]: Chien called the allegations in Pao’s lawsuit — including that he had declined to invite women to the Al Gore dinner because women “kill the buzz” — “hurtful and untrue,” and denied saying anything like that. Kleiner’s attorneys also showed multiple emails where Chien invited Pao to join meetings and business discussions she was interested in. [1] http://www.law360.com/articles/625265/kleiner-partner-held-all-male-al-gore-dinner-jury-told http://www.law360.com/articles/625265/kleiner-partner-held-a... [2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2015/02/25/kleiner-perkins-trial-ski-trip-dinner-party/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2015/02/25/kleiner-per...
javert 12y ago
I guess we need to start having all-female and all-male companies. It seems like trying to have the sexes get along is becoming a huge legal liability and not worth it.
- Dove 12y ago
  Well, that would only work for straight people. Everyone else would have to work on a team with a maximum size of two, which seems like a rather unfair way for the world to work. No, I think we're just going to have to figure out how to get along.
  - javert 12y ago
    That is utopianist thinking. There are always going to be personal vendettas between people. There is no amout of education or cultural change that will alter that fact. That is why we need courts, laws, rules, etc.
- youngButEager 12y ago
  Agreed. It's become too distracting and polarizing. What really screws up this tale is -- it's not a case of "unwanted advances." The fact that she says 'he made repeated unwanted advances' is simply NOT TRUE. I'm not even going to elucidate WHY what she said is patently not true. If you're aware of the history of what transpired for the entire length of time that Pao and Nazre you already know she's a liar. If I was on the KPCB legal team, I'd have to point out this fallacious claim she's made. Once you can show that a complainant is a liar -- it will destroy the rest of their case. If the complainant is willing to go on record and make a false statement to the court -- it's game over.
  - voltagex_ 12y ago
    >I'm not even going to elucidate WHY what she said is patently not true Why not?
    - meric 12y ago
patmcguire 12y ago
How on earth did this make it to trial? Is Kleiner Perkins crazy, or is Ellen Pao making a point?
- vasilipupkin 12y ago
  I agree, I am surprised they didn't quietly settle. The all male dinner party with Al Gore alone is pretty damning, in my opinion.
  - jkestner 12y ago
    Perhaps the tone-deafness that led to ignoring the original issues also applies to taking a lawsuit seriously.
- tdicola 12y ago
  They were probably trying to play chicken with Ellen and hope that she would be scared off by having to testify about her relationships, etc. in a trial. However it seems like they played right into what she wants and now all their dirty laundry is being aired in public.
ripb 12y ago
Looks like HN has gone to the Tumbler-esque SJWs. What a shame. RIP.
Potando 12y ago
Isn't this just office politics? It happens everywhere. It's not always "because you're a woman" but there are always people who dislike others and make it hard to do their job, don't invite them to work dinners, etc. That's bad but it's equally bad for people everywhere. And it's legal.
- huu 12y ago
  I think the point of the trial is to determine if what happened to Pao is "because she's a woman". If there's enough evidence for that claim, then there's a legal basis for recourse. If we could sweep any exclusionary behavior under the rug of "just office politics", there'd be no need for anti-discrimination laws in the first place.
  - Potando 12y ago
    It's sad that discrimination is fully acceptable and even encouraged by most workplaces, as long as it doesn't touch on any of the hot reasons - sex, race, religion = not OK. Nationality, personality, friends with boss = OK. I'd say personality and religion are both pretty similar in how difficult they are to change. So surely they should be treated similarly. The rules are just arbitrary. It would be OK if Pao was a man and "his" boss just didn't like him being a buzzkill at a party? Doesn't sound OK to me.
smegel 12y ago
Managers have been hitting on younger female subordinates/secretaries since the invention of capitalism. I fail to see what this has to do with Valley brogrammer culture (not that it doesn't exist). It wasn't even technically an IT firm.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
pbreit 12y ago
Curious timing: 5 Tips on Building an Amazing Team http://www.kpcb.com/blog/5-tips-on-building-an-amazing-team http://www.kpcb.com/blog/5-tips-on-building-an-amazing-team
hudibras 12y ago
Because there may be some confusion here about what HR does, I'll pick one of the less-salacious episodes, the RPX board seat issue, to illustrate how it would play out at an organization which had a competent HR department. First off, understand that discrimination based on sex or pregnancy is illegal in the United States. So if Ellen Pao walked into our hypothetical competent HR department and said that she had reason to believe that she's being discriminated against, HR would have cleared somebody's schedule to work with Ellen on this. It's serious shit, in other words. HR would ask Ellen for everything on her side of the story (essentially the same stuff that's coming out in court now), and then draft up a brief which describes all the evidence (using the term "evidence" loosely here because this is just Ellen's side for now). HR would then take this file to the person who is allegedly discriminating against Ellen (I think it would be John Doerr in this case) and say, "I need your undivided attention on this, this is a serious matter" and then get John's side of the story. After that, each situation is different, but it's pretty obvious to me that in the RPX case, HR would say to John "Look, it appears that Ellen did much more work on this than Randy so you need to think about why he got the board seat over her." In most workplaces, at this point John would look over the documentation and realize that he probably DID discriminate against her and, most importantly, would be aghast at what he'd done. So then HR would work with both Ellen and John to develop a solution, which would probably include John apologizing to Ellen for undervaluing her contribution and a promise that he'll do better in the future. End Scene. So in this scenario, not only does HR prevent a lawsuit from happening but also the company gets to keep a valued employee who can keep adding to the bottom line while at the same time educating her superior to keep better track of the contributions of all employees regardless of their race, sex, or background.
- jessaustin 12y ago
  This is an idealized scenario for HR involvement. It would be wonderful if HR were typically this ethical. At many companies, however, HR's primary goal in a situation like the one you describe would be to produce a paper trail that would enable firing the complaining employee without creating a problem for the complained-about executive. In general one is well-advised to speak to an attorney before going to HR for anything other than benefits questions.
- 12y ago
Rainymood 12y ago
(1) Talk about clickbait title? (2) While the issue is obviously very important: I feel like this post has a bias. There is absolutely no information about her husband's hedge fund going bankrupt, which seems to me like a motive to sue for money.
- tomp 12y ago
  How is her needing money a relevant argument in deciding if her lawsuit has merit?
gadders 12y ago
If anyone is interesting in reading the Trial Brief from Kleiner Perkins, the pdf is here: http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/256174979-Kleiner-Perkins-brief.pdf http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/256174...
the-dude 12y ago
And again an Indian descendant in a sexual harassment case. Is this a bias or a cultural thing?
- prognews4 12y ago
  Let me put it this way: Indian culture... is just like a flower. Very softness performance, pleasant!
lnanek2 12y ago
> “Matt Murphy said he had looked at the company before, and that the founding team ‘wasn’t business minded,’ and that they would not be able to generate revenues and create a sustainable business.” This honestly seems dead on about the past Twitter. It wasn't until they killed most of their API clients with enforcement bots and login token limits and forced in advertising and required display formats that they were really business minded. I don't think the article is helping to make it's point by claiming it is incorrect.

215 points by MilnerRoute 12y ago

simplemath 12y ago

Don't shit where you eat.

spinlock 12y ago
It's disappointing that this comment is getting downvoted. This case would be so much simpler if Pao had started talking about needing HR policies before she had an affair with a married co-worker.
- tptacek 12y ago
  Definitely. If only she had done things a little differently, she could have prevented her associates from having to discriminate against her for not continuing to date them.
  - hawkice 12y ago
    There is something to be said about how, if the patterns of discrimination were a more straight-forward story, it would be better for Pao. The issues around that one partner post-relationship seem to be only one part of much larger problem (assuming the allegations are even roughly true), but "having an affair with a married coworker" is the type of thing that people really get sidetracked on. The case could stand on its own without those events -- I think it's within good decency to point out the danger/distraction of these lateral issues.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - spinlock 12y ago
    Yes. This is why professionals don't date coworkers (married or otherwise).
    - andywood 12y ago
      Professionals do in fact date coworkers. It happens all the time - it's a matter of culture. Spend some time at Microsoft, for example. "Microsoft Married" is in the corporate slang lexicon on the intranet.
      - wyclif 12y ago
        He's implying that if you do date coworkers at the office it's unprofessional, not that people in a professional capacity don't make bad decisions and put their career at risk by dating coworkers.
        tptacek 12y ago
        Of course, what he's managing to imply is that women should not date men at their offices. Because it victimizes the men, who are forced to retaliate when the relationship ends, and then they look bad in the press.
        spinlock 12y ago
        Could you be more paternalistic? We're talking about a woman who was a partner at one of the best VC firms in the world. Pointing our her unprofessional behavior implies nothing more than that _she_ should have known better. If you really want to be a white knight, stop treating women at the top of the industry like interns.
        tptacek 12y ago
        "White knight" is definitely a term that makes me sit up and take notice that maybe it's me that might be on the worst possible side of a debate.
- huu 12y ago
  Interpreting your comment charitably, you are exactly right that it would be simpler had this been the case. Another fact: it would also be simpler had she not been (allegedly) lied to about the marriage status of the co-worker.
  - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
    You have to wonder about the ethics of someone who - by this account - was willing to tell obvious stupid lies about his marital status to get a few shags. If all of this is true, and it was the ethical baseline for co-worker relationships, what's the ethical baseline for client relationships?
    - sigzero 12y ago
      Why didn't she ask someone to verify. Sounds very shady to me. She knew he was married. I don't believe a lot of what she is saying now. Some but not all.
  - spinlock 12y ago
    "married" was only one word in my comment. Replace it with "recently separated" or even "single" and it still equals incredibly inappropriate conduct. the reason you don't dip your pen in the company ink is that it gets messy.
    - huu 12y ago
      I don't think we disagree. If it's valid to point out she shouldn't have been engaging in any kind of relationship with a co-worker, then it's equally valid to point out the same thing for the co-worker.
- jsprogrammer 12y ago
  According to her testimony (according to this article), the person whom she had the affair with made False Statements regarding his marital status.
  - sigzero 12y ago
    They worked together. I find zero credibility in that statement.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - olefoo 12y ago
      If someone you worked with were intentionally deceptive about the status of their romantic relationships how long would it take you to find out? Most people keep their work and personal lives somewhat separate for a reason.
- bmm6o 12y ago
  The case would also have been simpler if KPC was run like a real company that understood that it can be found liable for the discriminatory actions of its employees and the atmosphere that follows.
  - spinlock 12y ago
    Absolutely. I imagine this hypothetical company would have fired both parties who ingaged in an affair that caused friction at the office. My point was that Pao seems a day late and a dollar short by pursuing an HR solution after, rather than instead of, having an affair with a collegue.
scott_karana 12y ago
If you're talking about having relationships with semi-married coworkers: generally yes, you're right. However, I don't think your phrase applies to anything else about this case, hence the downvotes if people interpreted it differently than me... :)

TheMagicHorsey 12y ago

I know this is just one side of the story ... but if these facts are even remotely true, Kleiner is really a terrible place for women. This married dude just harassing co-workers left and right. How gross. Not inviting women partners to events. WTF? Who are these guys? Is this 2015? This guys webpage is almost a bigger crime than his alleged sexual misbehavior: http://www.ajitnazre.com/ http://www.ajitnazre.com/

exstudent2 12y ago
It is creepy but it IS just one side of the story. It seems premature to condem then until hearing all the info.
- trose 12y ago
  Well Lane did confirm his silly anecdote about his ex wife. That was a very inappropriate response to an employee reaching out to him about sexual harassment. He should have hired an HR consultant immediately. Additionally Nazre has a history of sexually harassing female coworkers so at this point it's looking pretty cut and dry.
mullen 12y ago
> This married dude just harassing co-workers left and right. How gross. I am little surprised that a VC is not firing people for doing this. Just strikes me as a huge liability and a great way to drive talent out of the shop.
- quaunaut 12y ago
  Apparently he was fired, but not for his conduct with Pao, but for sexually harassing another female partner.
  - cbsmith 12y ago
    The ol' "once is an accident, twice is a pattern" principle.

peteretep 12y ago

> the firm was not fastidious about certain key aspects of > HR and employment policy HR is an expensive luxury, until it's not, and your dirty laundry is all over TechCrunch. c.f. Github.

frandroid 12y ago
Yeah, because KPC, that poor startup, really couldn't afford proper HR. :P
- peteretep 12y ago
  Costs aren't always in straight dollars. Many people would consider HR to have a bureaucracy and agility cost far beyond the amount it costs to hire an HR staffer.
  - MattHeard 12y ago
    Sexual harassment investigations interrupting business?! We don't have time for that! /s
    - ugh123 12y ago
      Or just stop hiring assholes
      - shiven 12y ago
        If only LinkedIn had a radiobutton for that, or show an option to 'endorse' someone as an asshole... But, seriously, how do you, or anyone, actually do it? Humans are NP-hard in that regard. You will most likely only know a potato is hot once you are holding it in your hand. By then, it's already too late.
        jheriko 12y ago
        why not? i wish facebook had a 'dislike' button too, and twitter a public ignore count with how many people chose to ignore a stream... you can't learn with only positive feedback (assuming your brain is mostly neural network) we need the negative too. its a shame our current society is so stuck on protecting people from criticism...

lifeisstillgood 12y ago

One quote stands out for me - "we're a small partnership". Now it could be bad transcription by TC but that shows even after sueing them, Pao still thinks of Kleiner as part of her. It's hard to fake. I feel sorry for her - she has a huge uphill slog ahead of her, and even if she wins, her career is start on her own or move to growing oranges. I look forward to hearing Pao associates making investments in female founded businesses using money raised from female only investors. Probably the only way to get taken seriously.

frandroid 12y ago
Ahem... She's currently the interim CEO at Reddit. Good point on the "we" though.
victorhooi 12y ago
Not to take away from the merits of her case at all (which is still to be decided), but she is probably not hurting for money. She was earning what, $500,000 (i.e. half a million) a year at Kleiner? The USD 16 million she's seeking in damages is for lost income (apparently she could have earned up to $3 million a year if she got promoted at Kleiner). Not to mention her current husband is Alphonse 'Buddy' Fletcher Jr, an ex-hedge fund manager, who also sued his former employee in a $1.3 million lawsuit for discrimination. (Ironically, he's also been sued himself by two guys for sexual harassment, and apparently lost, but that was settled privately, so we don't know how much that was for). Either way, neither Pao nor her husband are hurting for cash. All the players on both sides are probably living in some stratospheric world that ordinary Joes like you and I probably can't even fathom.
- lifeisstillgood 12y ago
  It really isn't the point. Yes she earns multiples more than me, but on the partner track at kleiner she would expect to make millions. Chucking her out because she is a woman (or gay or not white or whatever) is an offence. We punish offences because that is what a fair society does. Even if the victim is not sympathetic or "one of us". In fact the last reason is the reason we have these laws - to defend people who are not one of us. Plus it is good to remind everyone once in a while that the law is in charge, not money, not anti-terrorism sentiment, not administrations. The law. It takes a battering, so it needs the occasional public win.

guelo 12y ago

Who are these people? Why do they get all the money from wall street and then get to go around acting like they're gods? A monkey could have done a good job of throwing money around Sillicon Valley and picking a bunch of winners over the last 10 years. Why hire these prima donnas to do it? Wall Street is a corrupt joke.

quaunaut 12y ago
A lot of the money from these investors didn't come from Wall St., but from past successful Silicon Valley tech companies.
- chetanahuja 12y ago
  Well actually the main sources of venture funds are similar to where wall-street goes for it's investment funds. Institutions (pension funds, state and national level reserve funds etc), wealthy individuals, cash reserves from large companies etc.
desireco42 12y ago
Beautifully said :)
neindanke 12y ago
> Who are these people? Ellen Pao, Harvard MBA. Job history was corporate attorney, other non-technical jobs. Ajit Nazre, Michigan Tech PHD. Job history unclear. Google hits on him mostly indicate a skeezy character. If the BI article is credible, most startups including the ones in India have dropped him like a rock after the lawsuit came out. > Why do they get all the money? Good question. Most engineers fail to realize how critical all of them are. They fail to demand fair compensation for their time. Instead they treat pats-on-the-back, a beer bust, maybe a gifted $10 ticket to see a scifi movie as major rewards while their management takes the bulk of the compensation pie.
- cowsandmilk 12y ago
  Ajit Nazre does not have a PhD from Michigan Tech, only a Masters. He has a PhD from Technische Universität Hannover and an MBA from Harvard. Ellen Pao has a JD from Harvard Law School in addition to her MBA.

tptacek 12y ago

She said that Lane [her and Nazre's supervisor] had responded not with action on the HR front, but by telling the story of how he had met his second wife while they were both working at Oracle. He had been married to his first wife at the time. Lane said that he had gone on to have a wonderful life with his former colleague — and that, perhaps, Pao could have that with Nazre. But, Pao said, Lane added that she and Nazre likely wouldn’t be able to work together. When Lane became involved with his current wife at Oracle, his wife had to quit. Pao said this implied that Lane was suggesting that she would have to leave Kleiner, too. “Did you tell Mr. Lane that you were interested in having a serious relationship with Mr. Nazre?” Lawless asked. “Absolutely not,” Pao said. Lane then suggested that she and Nazre have a one-on-one lunch to try and figure out how to work things out. (For his part, Lane said in his testimony last week that he only relayed this story to show how he understood how complicated workplace relationships could be.) This is vivid, credible, and damning, given that the anecdote about Lane's wife is, after his own testimony, an established fact of the case, as is apparently Pao's unwillingness to continue a personal relationship with Nazre, which is documented in emails. There are galactic-scale legal resources allocated to both sides of this controversy, so who knows where this will go next. But in the annals of "how not to respond to a personnel concern", this has to be right up there.

darkerside 12y ago
Knowing they were in the midst of an on-again off-again relationship, Lane may have had a reasonable assumption that there was still an intention to continue the relationship, without Pao explicitly stating that she was interested in a serious relationship. At this point, the fewer conclusions we all jump to the better.
- scott_karana 12y ago
  If someone in a relationship goes to their corporate HR manager for relationship assistance, I don't think your assumption is reasonable at all! If they were a marriage counselor, or a close friend, sure, but somehow I think nobody willing to salvage a personal relationship is going to bring it to their office's attention for assistance...

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

foobarqux 12y ago
Pao was making $560k all in. Part of the complaint is that she thought she deserved to be senior partner, where she would have made $3 million. http://www.highly.co/hl/54ff8b476c696c0322060000 http://www.highly.co/hl/54ff8b476c696c0322060000

jakejake 12y ago

“It was said that if there were women there, that the conversation would be tempered, and it was because women kill the buzz” What alternate planet are these guys living on? A mixed crowd is always more interesting in my book, that goes for personal and professional get-togethers.

r00fus 12y ago
I've been in meetings and cultures years before where your attitude (which I share) was not the prevailing atmosphere. In those places, I could imagine women feeling like a hen in a fox's den.
rodgerd 12y ago
"Yeah, we're going to talk about how to do business successfully, but we don't want to include any women because our success doesn't depend in any way on half the planet."
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
ripb 12y ago
Fuck this site
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
pbhjpbhj 12y ago
FWIW women too like single sex gatherings. Source: work in hospitality and get request for "no male servers" or specific female hosts. It seems in the OP that it's a social gathering??
- 12y ago

conorh 12y ago

Admittedly I'm not unbiased, having done work for KPCB (although I know nothing about this case). However, I am extremely disappointed reading the comments in this thread and in the media. People seem ready to jump to conclusions and crucify having only heard one side of the story, I suppose that makes for great stories in the media, but why not let the court case play out and hear both sides first?

ripb 12y ago
Fuck this site
vasilipupkin 12y ago
that certainly seems sensible on the surface, but I have to say, even if every single thing Pao said is made up, the fact that they held an dinner party with Vice President of the United States as the guest of honor and did not invite a single female partner is pretty hard to explain in any sort of reasonable fashion
- conorh 12y ago
  Aha, see here you have extrapolated from the framing in the media headlines (and the plaintiff), without actually looking at any context. So to look at what you just said and present it differently: (note: I'm not coming down on either side of this, just presenting the other side, see [1]) 1. He was not the Vice President of the United States then. He is (and was then) a KPCB partner. 2. He was not the guest of honor, this was a dinner party at his apartment for the 10 people that could fit. Apparently he is fond of hosting dinners there and does many of them. At this event there were only two KPCB partners. Is it a stretch to imagine that two out of all the partners at KPCB for this particular dinner might not include a female partner? Also in Chien's testimony [2]: Chien called the allegations in Pao’s lawsuit — including that he had declined to invite women to the Al Gore dinner because women “kill the buzz” — “hurtful and untrue,” and denied saying anything like that. Kleiner’s attorneys also showed multiple emails where Chien invited Pao to join meetings and business discussions she was interested in. [1] http://www.law360.com/articles/625265/kleiner-partner-held-all-male-al-gore-dinner-jury-told http://www.law360.com/articles/625265/kleiner-partner-held-a... [2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2015/02/25/kleiner-perkins-trial-ski-trip-dinner-party/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2015/02/25/kleiner-per...

javert 12y ago

I guess we need to start having all-female and all-male companies. It seems like trying to have the sexes get along is becoming a huge legal liability and not worth it.

Dove 12y ago
Well, that would only work for straight people. Everyone else would have to work on a team with a maximum size of two, which seems like a rather unfair way for the world to work. No, I think we're just going to have to figure out how to get along.
- javert 12y ago
  That is utopianist thinking. There are always going to be personal vendettas between people. There is no amout of education or cultural change that will alter that fact. That is why we need courts, laws, rules, etc.
youngButEager 12y ago
Agreed. It's become too distracting and polarizing. What really screws up this tale is -- it's not a case of "unwanted advances." The fact that she says 'he made repeated unwanted advances' is simply NOT TRUE. I'm not even going to elucidate WHY what she said is patently not true. If you're aware of the history of what transpired for the entire length of time that Pao and Nazre you already know she's a liar. If I was on the KPCB legal team, I'd have to point out this fallacious claim she's made. Once you can show that a complainant is a liar -- it will destroy the rest of their case. If the complainant is willing to go on record and make a false statement to the court -- it's game over.
- voltagex_ 12y ago
  >I'm not even going to elucidate WHY what she said is patently not true Why not?
  - meric 12y ago

patmcguire 12y ago

How on earth did this make it to trial? Is Kleiner Perkins crazy, or is Ellen Pao making a point?

vasilipupkin 12y ago
I agree, I am surprised they didn't quietly settle. The all male dinner party with Al Gore alone is pretty damning, in my opinion.
- jkestner 12y ago
  Perhaps the tone-deafness that led to ignoring the original issues also applies to taking a lawsuit seriously.
tdicola 12y ago
They were probably trying to play chicken with Ellen and hope that she would be scared off by having to testify about her relationships, etc. in a trial. However it seems like they played right into what she wants and now all their dirty laundry is being aired in public.

ripb 12y ago

Looks like HN has gone to the Tumbler-esque SJWs. What a shame. RIP.

Potando 12y ago

Isn't this just office politics? It happens everywhere. It's not always "because you're a woman" but there are always people who dislike others and make it hard to do their job, don't invite them to work dinners, etc. That's bad but it's equally bad for people everywhere. And it's legal.

huu 12y ago
I think the point of the trial is to determine if what happened to Pao is "because she's a woman". If there's enough evidence for that claim, then there's a legal basis for recourse. If we could sweep any exclusionary behavior under the rug of "just office politics", there'd be no need for anti-discrimination laws in the first place.
- Potando 12y ago
  It's sad that discrimination is fully acceptable and even encouraged by most workplaces, as long as it doesn't touch on any of the hot reasons - sex, race, religion = not OK. Nationality, personality, friends with boss = OK. I'd say personality and religion are both pretty similar in how difficult they are to change. So surely they should be treated similarly. The rules are just arbitrary. It would be OK if Pao was a man and "his" boss just didn't like him being a buzzkill at a party? Doesn't sound OK to me.

smegel 12y ago

Managers have been hitting on younger female subordinates/secretaries since the invention of capitalism. I fail to see what this has to do with Valley brogrammer culture (not that it doesn't exist). It wasn't even technically an IT firm.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

pbreit 12y ago

Curious timing: 5 Tips on Building an Amazing Team http://www.kpcb.com/blog/5-tips-on-building-an-amazing-team http://www.kpcb.com/blog/5-tips-on-building-an-amazing-team

hudibras 12y ago

Because there may be some confusion here about what HR does, I'll pick one of the less-salacious episodes, the RPX board seat issue, to illustrate how it would play out at an organization which had a competent HR department. First off, understand that discrimination based on sex or pregnancy is illegal in the United States. So if Ellen Pao walked into our hypothetical competent HR department and said that she had reason to believe that she's being discriminated against, HR would have cleared somebody's schedule to work with Ellen on this. It's serious shit, in other words. HR would ask Ellen for everything on her side of the story (essentially the same stuff that's coming out in court now), and then draft up a brief which describes all the evidence (using the term "evidence" loosely here because this is just Ellen's side for now). HR would then take this file to the person who is allegedly discriminating against Ellen (I think it would be John Doerr in this case) and say, "I need your undivided attention on this, this is a serious matter" and then get John's side of the story. After that, each situation is different, but it's pretty obvious to me that in the RPX case, HR would say to John "Look, it appears that Ellen did much more work on this than Randy so you need to think about why he got the board seat over her." In most workplaces, at this point John would look over the documentation and realize that he probably DID discriminate against her and, most importantly, would be aghast at what he'd done. So then HR would work with both Ellen and John to develop a solution, which would probably include John apologizing to Ellen for undervaluing her contribution and a promise that he'll do better in the future. End Scene. So in this scenario, not only does HR prevent a lawsuit from happening but also the company gets to keep a valued employee who can keep adding to the bottom line while at the same time educating her superior to keep better track of the contributions of all employees regardless of their race, sex, or background.

jessaustin 12y ago
This is an idealized scenario for HR involvement. It would be wonderful if HR were typically this ethical. At many companies, however, HR's primary goal in a situation like the one you describe would be to produce a paper trail that would enable firing the complaining employee without creating a problem for the complained-about executive. In general one is well-advised to speak to an attorney before going to HR for anything other than benefits questions.
12y ago

Rainymood 12y ago

(1) Talk about clickbait title? (2) While the issue is obviously very important: I feel like this post has a bias. There is absolutely no information about her husband's hedge fund going bankrupt, which seems to me like a motive to sue for money.

tomp 12y ago
How is her needing money a relevant argument in deciding if her lawsuit has merit?

gadders 12y ago

If anyone is interesting in reading the Trial Brief from Kleiner Perkins, the pdf is here: http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/256174979-Kleiner-Perkins-brief.pdf http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/256174...

the-dude 12y ago

And again an Indian descendant in a sexual harassment case. Is this a bias or a cultural thing?

prognews4 12y ago
Let me put it this way: Indian culture... is just like a flower. Very softness performance, pleasant!

lnanek2 12y ago

> “Matt Murphy said he had looked at the company before, and that the founding team ‘wasn’t business minded,’ and that they would not be able to generate revenues and create a sustainable business.” This honestly seems dead on about the past Twitter. It wasn't until they killed most of their API clients with enforcement bots and login token limits and forced in advertising and required display formats that they were really business minded. I don't think the article is helping to make it's point by claiming it is incorrect.