Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

If 2017 teaches us nothing, it's that we really need a period in this country when white men sit down and shut up and let women and people of color make more of the calls on this issue and every other one.

With that, I'll stop.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Maybe I'm whiffing, but you would certainly get written up for doing that. Are you in a sole shop now? Because you seem way off. Of course some of it is bullshit, but it is baked into today's workplace.

The only time I ever got in trouble:

20 years ago we are doing a seminar to in-house patent counsel. Senior male GP, mid-level male GP, a young female GP, me, as a youngish GP and firm's female marketing director. We are in a meeting prepping for the seminar. Marketing director says "we got two more attorneys signed up!" Senior GP says, "who?" Meaning "what company." Marketing director says "i forget, two women." Senior GP goes, "Oh," and moves on to something else. Now here's a fact about Hank. My practice is built from a single in-house female attorney that I was a kid lawyer with. She bounced from job to job and brought me in at each. As you can imagine once I'm in, people love me so I kept the work after she would move on. But, important point: without this one woman and the work she sent me I would not be able to waste all my work days posting on the internet. I'd have to actually work for senior GP. And everyone knows my practice came from her.

So after senior GP dismisses the news of two women showing up, I say "yeah, who needs chick lawyers." Which everyone, including senior GP, had to recognize was making fun of senior GP's (flower, is that irony?) reaction. Then I stepped out of the room and came back two minutes later. Apparently while I was gone Senior and mid-level GPs started goofing about what female lawyers could do for them- not sexual, but like maybe they can bake snacks.

Later that day marketing director and youngish female GP stepped into my office and explained how wrong what I said was. In fact our firm's labor department has a training film that shows basically that scenario as an example.

I said my practice is built upon a woman attorney and I just wanted to deflect senior GP's stupid dismissal, but then I apologized unconditionally.

The next day I was talking to marketing director and something came up and she made a double entendre joke. And I looked at her and said, "in this environment I cannot even respond to that." She said, "you're right I shouldn't have said that." And I said, "or we can both act as adults and take context into account?"

But, the point is, we work in a country where a high percentage of the country voted for a corrupt insane man or a third party candidate. Americans are stupid and you cannot count on people seeing nuance, or understanding reality.

I get you post to argue but what you are saying about the current "okay behavior" is way off.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Serious question, do you think the photo normalized the behavior? I do. And it empowers other men to do something similar because, a champion of women, Al fucking F did it.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Maybe, but it took another 6 women making accusations before he resigned.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This is a weird thing to say.

It may surprise you, but people don't make crazy ass ludicrous claims, because why the fuck would they? There isn't a huge pot of gold at the end of the only-the-accuser-thinks-they-were-harassed rainbow. Almost everyone has gone through training and everyone understands what crosses the line. When someone does make a claim that doesn't meet any sort of established standard, they are almost always shut down. There is always an investigation. No sexual harassment policy is used as a hammer (unless the accuser is flat-out lying and that's a completely different story).

If you're going to say, "But what about Franken?" Well, we didn't have an investigation and there was no punishment through any workplace channels.

How do you function knowing that a lot of the law is based on what a reasonable person would do? You must be drowning in creative hypotheticals.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

What are you talking about with this nonsense? This is the current standard and none of this bullshit happens.

Also, who the hell puts up an offensive amount of photos of their daughter in form-fitting clothes?

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

"Women can experience anything as harassment." Uh, no.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

No more than Roy Moore has normalized grown men signing high-school yearbooks.

Yah
 

Being that the only person hurt was the bomber, a 27 year old Pakistani (who drove for Uber, by the way) and I am not a 27 year old Pakistani who drives for Uber, yah, I am ok.

Re: Yah
 

More people died snowboarding into fences today at Tahoe, but that doesn't have the same frisson of danger.

Re: Yah
 

No one has to go snowboarding at Tahoe tomorrow. Some people do have to get on NYC trains, and I have to run on the bike path.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

But a person's sensitivity is not a classification protected by laws. Thyere must be some sort of waiver, "assumption of the risk" or "coming to the nuisance" doctrine. Otherwise, how can strip clubs operate?

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Uber, but for hiring.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I'm presently exiting a side gig dealing with way more HR than I'd like. (I have to fake it through most of it, as I find the stuff really tawdry, and most people involved in those controversies a mix of stunningly stupid and clinically delusional.)

Still, nobody gets fired for talking up his or her love for Taylor Swift. You could scream it in the hallways -- "I think Taylor Swift is the hot-hot-hottiest hottie of them all!" -- and it's not a firing matter. (At least for harassment reasons.)

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

It happens a lot. People rarely hear about it because the claims are bought off in exchange for confidential agreements.

"That claim is retarded."

"Yeah, but it'll pass a motion to dismiss and cost a bunch in fees."

"Right. Kill it cheap."

Rinse, repeat. In Philly, the cost of nuisance claims of harassment and discrimination are assumed. It's basically an unofficial tax.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

How do you square that with the statement, "Harassment is entirely subjective, within the victim's mind."?

If there's an objective baseline which must be passed in order for someone's claim to be legitimate, it cannot be an entirely subjective thing.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They do it when they're fired. And if HR hasn't papered the file adequately in terms of prior discipline, they'll get a lawyer, and if they're in a protected class, the sensible economic decision is almost always to write them a check.

Agreed. It's usually when fired.

Faced with a he said/she said situation, it's almost always cheaper to write a small check.

We agree on Franken. Franken got fucked.

That's only half the standard. Economically, it almost always makes sense to write a check, even for the shittiest claim. The other, often more compelling standard is:

Does the potential cost and aggravation approach, meet, or eclipse the cost of $$$ this person will take to walk away? Unless it risks setting a bad precedent, buying off risk at annoyance cost is almost always the prudent course. You never know where this stuff goes. Why take even the long odds of a dollar cost where you can kill the risk for a dime?

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Cite, please.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Sebby knows things, TM.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Yeah. You sound like Trump. "A lot of people are saying..."

Your post is about as convincing as the belief that white people are being constantly screwed by reverse discrimination.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I've actually seen one where a bigot, being fired for being a bigot, got paid on a retaliatory sex discrim claim. Serve: You're a bigot. You gotta go. Return: Yeah? Well my boss is a sexist, and he treated me badly. Volley back: Damnit. Here's a check. Sign this release and fuck off.

Shit happens all the time.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I do not believe you. Maybe you saw this occur (although I think 70% of the examples you've experienced or heard are completely made up). But I do not believe this happens often and I happen to know quite a few people who work in talent development at a number of places (departments which handle terminations). It is rare. And organizations almost *always* fight it when there's no evidence of discrimination.

I bet in the case you reference, the bigot's boss was indeed a sexist asshole. Whether a bigot should be rewarded for experiencing sexism is beside the point. You make it sound like she made it up on the spot. And if your story is true (and I kind of think you made it up), you bet your ass there was evidence of sexism.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

All. the. time.

Whether you believe me or not is immaterial. If you fire someone who has a scintilla of a claim, there's a decent chance you'll hear from a lawyer.

I don't believe you know much about the subject, or you wouldn't say what you have. This shit isn't some hidden wisdom. It's well known to almost any employment lawyer.

It's a risk free method to collect a few dollars on the way out the door. Sure, people fight it. But a lot more make simple business decisions. You know this. You're just being a pain in the balls.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Fact is no one talks much about the justified discrimination claim or the claim that should have been brought because someone is just racist as hell or openly harassing people because, well, these things are everyday and not surprising to anyone. Just looking at law firms where I've worked, a fraction of the claims that could be brought are.

Everyone talks about every single "reverse" discrimination or unjustified discrimination case brought because they're few and far between. I've seen precisely one discrimination case that shouldn't have been brought,but it's one of the cases I've ended up talking about a fair bit because it has some unique features that make it interesting.

Sure, all kinds of stuff happens. The monkey does occasionally type a line from Shakespeare. But the stuff that happens every goddamn day is what we ought to be focused on.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think you're confused about what civil rights are. The government's protection of a right to a workplace that is free of sexual harassment is not an effort to solve a market failure that inhibits bargaining between private parties around what the optimum workplace should be like (Boss: I really value the ability to grope my subordinates. Potential subordinate: I'm not crazy about being groped, but the other job I'm looking at has a longer commute, so for the right price I guess I'm fine with that.). Civil rights are inalienable rights that you get by virtue of being a human and a citizen, and so cannot be bargained away.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I'm not having the subjective/objective discussion. You are, but I'm not sure with whom. (The point I was making, which you are either missing or ducking, is that your description of what might or might not be harassment assumes a male point of view, for no apparent reason other than that it is your own.)

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Of course there was. It was a workplace that involved men. By now we should know it's everywhere.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Less might want to consider this story.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Agreed. Professionals and higher-ups don't bring them too much because even if resolved by a confidential agreement, other employers in one's field will find out about claim. And people don't hire people who bring claims.

The nuisance claims are the problem. Lower level workers don't have as much to lose, so they roll the dice.

It's a lot more common than that.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Actually, it is quite material if you're full of shit.

Again, this is bullshit. And the idea that you just say it's so but can't point to any evidence other than that one time you personally witnessed it is pure Sebby.

What you believe is immaterial.

No. What is well known to employment lawyers is that companies need to have their ducks in a row when they fire someone in order to avoid lawsuits that the firing was unfair for any number of reasons (even when it comes to at-will employees).

It is not risk-free, jackass. If you go through with the suit, you risk your career going forward because companies don't want to hire employees who have sued their previous employers for any reason.

You started off saying that a subjective standard creates situations in which anything can be seen as sexist and offensive. You then created a world in which people are constantly taking advantage of the standard you think is squishy. It is not true. It is rare. And I don't give a care in the world if you say, "It happens all the time," until you're blue in the face.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Of course it’s risk-free, you moron. You have a lawyer call, threaten with some facts, and if you were a lower level employee, there’s a good chance you’ll be paid to go away.

If the bluff doesn’t work, you don’t have to bring the claim.

The guy with all the risk is the lawyer. If a lawyer gets his bluff called twice, he’s going to have an issue with future claims.

When was the last time you were on the phone with the head of HR? I can tell you when I was. Three hours ago. In your own words, Cliff Claven: fuck out of here.

Yep
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/11/o...imes&smtyp=cur

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This is a ridiculous argument. An employee can bring a claim against a boss for pushing them down a flight of stairs too. It surely would be cheaper to pay them off than to litigate it. But there needs to be some evidence of the employee being pushed down a flight of stairs. And if your argument is that employees now make assertions through their lawyer of sexual harassment because the standard isn't objective enough such that this is a thing that happens all the time, you are full of shit.

Again, this is true of everything under the sun.

Well, that proves you know everything and it certainly proves your ridiculous claims, Woody.* Now fuck off, you full-of-shit windbag.

TM

*I liked this better than Norm. Fits better.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Nuisance claims are just that, a nuisance.

If you end up paying out $20K and paying a $10K professional bill for a nuisance claim to get a release and confidentiality agreement on terminating an $80-100K employee who was a problem at their time of severance, I'd tell you (i) you're probably paying him (it's always a him) less than he'd already cost your business in bad will and damages, and (ii) your severance costs are still well below those of almost any other place in the world. Of course, management may feel out of sorts because no one likes to stroke a check to someone who hurt their business. But they hired him.

And my experience is the one's who pay more than the occasional nuisance claim are usually either hiring bums because they pay squat and have a bad reputation as a place to work or generating real claims because they're racist or sexist assholes or managerial nightmares.

Re: Yep
 

I'll sum it up as simply as this: by staying, Al would have been an obstacle to the change that needs to happen. By leaving, he's part of that change.

I can agree with Ms. Teachout that we need a better process to handle these things. And with you that losing a seat isn't the right penalty for every offense. But until that process is in place and some standards are set, he had to go because of the ongoing political harm and harm to the cause of taking inappropriate sexual conduct seriously his presence was doing.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Dead on, and more persuasive that what I posted. Please disregard my attempt to use logic and experience with Sebby.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I've fired one racist male and 3 or 4 young women who did some dumb dumb stuff. We never got any claim of anything at the time of the firings, but at the time of firings we offered a severance that was nice enough we knew they couldn't say no. And yes, the "cost" of each severance was much cheaper than the harm.

On the other hand, my daughter had a "job" in NYC that promised $20/hour. Office work in the mail room. The catch was you needed to train for 5 days for free, then you start cashing checks!!! Her first day was her co-worker's 5th. She started mailing crap immediately, it was not training, it was the job. At the end of the fifth day the guy fired the co-worker. My daughter had the good timing to only waste one day. But she didn't think of sticking it out and suing. And there has to be some NYC law that that shit violates. I mean the guy staffed his company with free desperate labor.

But I'm not sure how we got to this point, because I'm still stuck back on "it isn't harassment to walk around an office saying how hot Taylor Swift is."

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I tried to move past that fast. Got a kind of Roy Moore/ Spanky vibe off Sebby's post and really can't deal with that now.