431–440 of 471 posts
"A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously " Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part, with respect to due process and how the framework for anonymous accusations can be abused by bad actors? Edit - I have a question about the anonymous nature of reporting to HR, with respect to due process for the accuser and accused, maybe some o…
> Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part… In general, 21% of workers who report misconduct suffer from retribution (source: National Business Ethics Survey). An estimated 75% of workplace harassment victims experience retaliation when they speak up (source: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission government agency).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is more than that: there is a will from upper management to actively prevent such issues from being handled appropriately. > Larry and Sergey had like this gaggle of girls who were hot, and all become like their little harem of admins, I call them the L&S Harem, yes. All those girls are now different heads of departments in that company, years later. > Sergey’s the Google playboy. He was known for getting…
holy shit. i hadn't seen that before. HR seems to have been completely captured by the forces it was supposed to resist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> just ask the Catholic Church If priests had been moved around for simply leering at a woman or making a suggestive sexual comment I don’t think there would have been any outrage. I hope you don’t think I’m suggesting a company should cover up serious crimes - or any crimes for that matter.
> I hope you don’t think I’m suggesting a company should cover up serious crimes You are suggesting that they should shuffle people around without investigation to quiet complaints of situations against which are obligated by law to protect their employees, including potentially involuntary reassignment of the reporting party (again, without investigation of the facts) despite the legal prohibition on retaliation.
Uh no - to protect their employees from abuse.
> despite the legal prohibition on retaliation.
Why is it retaliation to seperate the accused and accuser?
In fact if you don’t seperate them you are opening yourself up to legal liability and a PR nightmare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"What about the men?" is a bingo square not an argument.
Until you replace 'men' with any other sex, race, gender, etc. Calling valid, if perhaps overblown concerns is just 'bingo squares' maybe you need to consider your own bias.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a war against boys. We medicated an entire generation with psychotropic drugs to make them more passive.
The phrase strikes me as hyperbolic, but I agree there is a real problem underlying it. My point was that people should base their opinions on CHS' claims on her evidence and arguments, rather than who she associates with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phrase strikes me as hyperbolic, but I agree there is a real problem underlying it. My point was that people should base their opinions on CHS' claims on her evidence and arguments, rather than who she associates with.
What would you call it then?
Edit: I'm not trying to change your approach, I'm just being blunt about my opinions. I appreciate your open mindedness.
All of their demands seem pretty reasonable. It looks like the big gripe is that basically there's no real process in place for situations of misconduct in the office. To draw an analogy, this would be like Google not having a process to investigate and resolve site outages - it would be unthinkable, so why aren't they treating their organisation with the same rigor they treat their website.
Maybe they should unionize? They could then elect representatives and have a seat at the table with management.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_VL4gqrCHc&t=392
But if they did that, they be giving up control over their careers and the right to deal with their problems with their supervisors, one on one. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part… In general, 21% of workers who report misconduct suffer from retribution (source: National Business Ethics Survey). An estimated 75% of workplace harassment victims experience retaliation when they speak up (source: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission government agency).
I can't make sense of these numbers. Can you report misconduct without speaking up? Or is there a lot of retaliation that doesn't induce any suffering, or...?
"A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously " Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part, with respect to due process and how the framework for anonymous accusations can be abused by bad actors? Edit - I have a question about the anonymous nature of reporting to HR, with respect to due process for the accuser and accused, maybe some o…
> Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part… In general, 21% of workers who report misconduct suffer from retribution (source: National Business Ethics Survey). An estimated 75% of workplace harassment victims experience retaliation when they speak up (source: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission government agency).
Lilia M. Cortina & Vicki J. Magley, Raising Voice, Risking Retaliation: Events Following Interpersonal Mistreatment in the Workplace, 8:4 J. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PSYCHOL. 247, 255 (2003).