> It was against the rules at the company to sleep with someone you were in charge of, even if not directly -- even if there were several layers between your position and theirs. Therefore, any high ranking man in a different department that slept with me was de facto barring me from ever working under him. Depending on his position in the department, this could bar me from a single team or multiple teams or the entire department.
That clarifies things. So he would have been your manager had you successfully joined the IT team you applied to?
> but the fact that he stubbornly continued them for few days without noticing that the girl is completely turned off and freaked out by him.
She says she laughed at the sexual comments made by her manager.
> I remember thinking to myself, “Did I do something to encourage this kind of behaviour?” I had uncomfortably laughed at some of the sexual comments my manager had made because I didn’t know how else to react as a junior member of the team. Should I not have done that?
> I engaged in sexual misconduct with multiple women
The term misconduct is used usually in the work environment when one party is in a position of power, like a boss of another. This is not the case here.
> This behavior may imply life long psychological consequence for them.
Or may not. Or maybe refusal to engage with women could imply life long psychological consequence for them: women as well as men feel bad when they are rejected.
Don't decide for women what's best for them. They are grown up adults and engage in these relationships voluntarily.
> Yes they are the victims
Victims are those who were assaulted against their will. My understanding that there was no violations like that in this story.
> I believe this person was in a consensual relationship that broke a work rule. He broke no actual laws and was not accused of doing so AFAIK.
The allegations were of sexual harassment, which is illegal. That it was handled at the employer level rather than a civil suit doesn’t change that fact.
> Your boss stating that he wants to have sex with you is stupid, unethical, and unprofessional. It's not clear that it's sexual harassment, unless he was told to stop yet continued anyway.
Your boss by definition is in a position of power over you. If they date you (let alone ask for sex in this manner!), they can be seen as exploiting their power over you, or you being treated differently in return for sex. That just doesn't work. It's always unethical, regardless of consent of the employee (who might also be too afraid to say no).
> > 4) Do not have sex with another employee UNLESS a) you have asked that person for that privilege and they have responded with an emphatic "YES! I will have sex with you" AND b) the two (or more) of you do not work in the same chain of command. Yes, that means that Travis will be celibate on this trip. #CEOLife #FML
> This is completely inappropriate to bring up in this way in a work environment.
Active consent is a good thing and always good to bring up at social events. Pretending that some staff don't have sex with other - particularly staff who spend long hours in the same environment - is naive and dangerous, since it stops issues like this from being addressed. Pointing out that not having sex with someone who reports you applies to EVERYONE is also important.
> Not only does this text give a green light to very questionable behavior
What questionable behavior does it give a green light to?
There was no cat-calling in this case, so why bring that up? I suppose you could mention also that it's not okay to rape your co-workers too. Kinda disingenuous though, isn't it? Bringing it up in the context of this story implies that it happened.
> But I think banning all relationships between a boss and subordinate is stupid.
Maybe it is, and maybe it isn't, but telling a story about how people commonly drawn the inference that the participants in such a relationship are engaging in an improper sex-for-job-rewards exchange with toxic effects on personal and working relations is an odd choice to support that claim.
> As opposed to jetti, I'm not sure the wife would just have found somebody else.
Irrelevant.
Here's the problem:
"At the same time, every time I see his face, I feel like that just kills me inside."
It is silly to think that this doesn't affect productivity and won't affect the business in the future, especially with communication between these two individuals. A person's well being does is in fact a work matter, the acknowledgment of which makes the employees position absolutely untenable. You cannot possibly sleep with a fellow employee's spouse (regardless of whether it is a superior or not) and not expect that to be a work matter.
> It's as if they expect the boss to be able to tell employees who they can fuck.
This isn't about telling the employee who they can fuck. It's about fostering a productive and positive work environment. Knowingly choosing to create animosity between yourself and a superior (or any fellow employee for that matter) in such a hurtful manner is simply stupid.
>>My point was more related to the fact that we (myself included) tend to maintain relationships that are clearly unhealthy in hindsight.
We don't have any indication that she lacked the capacity to disengage. She was dating her boss, and may have feared retaliation.
That's one reason dating your superiors or direct reports is a big no-no. The power dynamic can only be managed by the most mature couples, and even then it's a huge liability for the company.
> I can see a few reasons why I wouldn't want to say anything, especially if this person wasn't a direct report.
Really?
The guy was the COO, almost by definition everyone else in the company reports to him through some direct line.
The guy admitted to having a physical relationship. There is absolutely no gray area here as far as HR would be concerned.
Your a C level exec, you have a physical relationship with someone else at the company, whether or not it stopped before that person arrived, you report it the first moment you know that person starts working at your company.
I agree relationships are messy and life has lots of gray areas. This, however, is not one of them. This is HR 101 and if your still not convinced he admitted he knew this and should have reported it.
> Oftentimes, a role changes to something that an employee didn't sign up for.
...which is also generally bad if the role is materially different and goes on top of what was signed up for, with little to no extra compensation.
> Perhaps there is something unique about sex and how it interacts with power dynamics?
Suppose that your boss asked you, in addition to your current duties, instead of giving sexual favors, you follow him home and do all his laundry - with the same implication that your career hinges on it. Would that change the power dynamic? I don't think so. The only thing that "sex" changes is that it arouses attention.
> perhaps the offender was picking up on signals that weren't there.
Who would ask his love interest to sit on his lap at work?
Do you really think that this is appropriate for even lovers in the workplace?
Even if there was something going there between them, it's unprofessional to flirt and fool around while working. Call me old school or what but we have weekends and off-work hours for these types of activities and everyone should make use of them accordingly.
If it happened it was a relationship between two consenting adults, so there is not really a reason for them to care.
reply