Slashdot Mirror
Tech Boss Attacks 'Whiners' in Angry Email (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The co-founder of a Silicon Valley investment firm said it is "not my job to make you all feel good" in a long email to staff and investors. Jonathan Teo from Binary Capital was responding to negative press coverage about the firm following allegations of sexual harassment by his co-founder Justin Caldbeck. He added that he was "tired and indignant," and raged against "whiners" who demanded his attention. Mr Teo has already offered to resign. He did so after Mr Caldbeck left the firm in June. "I'm incredibly sorry," Mr Caldbeck tweeted when the news broke last month. Mr Caldbeck's actions were one of several sexism scandals to rock Silicon Valley in recent months. They include a damning report into the work culture inside ride-hailing firm Uber, and the resignation of venture capitalist Dave McClure, who admitted "inexcusable behaviour" towards "multiple women."
This guy is whining about whiners. I guess he's looking for cheese to go with his whine.
This guy isn't accused of doing anything wrong. The guy who *was* accused has resigned. Right?
So why is it this guy's job to constantly apologize for the actions of someone he had no control over and who has already been forced out of the firm? It's not his fucking fault his former partner was an asshole.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
"If you were teaching PR 101 this guy has just done everything possible wrong. He has insulted clients, he has insulted investors, he has insulted employees and he has insulted the media.
Sexual harassment isn't whining, it's a fucking legal issue.
If he can't deal with issues in his company he doesn't need to get permission to resign, he needs to stop whining himself and just fucking quit.
I could swear this site is getting more and more like those rags you see on the shelf at the supermarket checkout lines. Quick, better go buy a copy of Us or the National Enquirer!
As the head of this company, it is his job to motivate employees. Otherwise known as "making them feel good".
This is yet another child with money.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
As it should. A work place is a place where work happens. Bosses hitting on their subordinates shouldn't happen. It's toxic to a work culture. My company has very strong policies about sexual harassment, including a ban on anyone entering into a sexual relationship with a subordinate. While the latter isn't sexual harassment, it's terrible for morale, and can be incredibly disruptive.
Surely your an adult and you can keep your hands to yourself, and you tongue firmly planted in your mouth when it comes to sexual or even flirtatious comments. And if you are incapable of that, then I would suggest the problem is yours. I know damned few fucking women that come to work hoping their boss or the guy in the cubicle next to them hits on them
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with you people? Are you all incapable of actually holding down a job that involves working with women? Are you that emotionally-driven that you can't just do your goddamned job and treat your coworkers with dignity and respect? Whether it's sexual harassment, or any other kind of harassment, any boss who doesn't take that seriously is asking for goddamned trouble, up to and including costly lawsuits. If you can't keep it in your pants, literally or metaphorically, then a judge will make you.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Or, you know, just keep it in your pants like an adult. I have worked for most of my life with women, some as bosses and supervisors, some as equals, and some as subordinates, and I've never had any issues at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Oh puhleese...
Trump's election does not change the generations long movement to political correctness that has taken over in the U.S.'s corporate culture.
Trump was NOT my choice for president & I am all for sexual equality and an end to harassment in the workplace.
When even an innocuous appreciative but not lecherly comment comment like "nice dress" on the one day a co-worker wears something particularly attractive is deemed sexual harassment, the movement has gone too far.
Yeah, yeah, keep pointing to the exceptions and strive to make people believe that ALL athletes/VC execs/geeks are sexual predators.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Ahh, Good old Victim Blaming.
Because women love all the media attention and judgments, putting their career at risk, just for a payday, that is probably less than a full year wage. Well worth loosing out on a career that you wanted to do all your life.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Yep, this is the new way to make up for the perceived pay-gap women claim they experience.
It's not a good time to be a guy...especially a white guy. Anyone can hang an accusation of racist, mysoginist, xyz-ist....and it will stick and often cost you as that you are guilty till proven innocent.
Sure, some of these cases ARE legit, but there are so many out there that are not.
Guys....you need to be scared of being guys in the workforce.
Best advice is...DO NOT Attempt to date within the work environment, you are only asking for it....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
There are no lack of workplace bullying lawsuits, and while I can't speak for every organization, the definition of harassment in our policies is pretty darned broad, and largely because our lawyers over the years have made it pretty clear that if a harassment lawsuit of any kind is delivered to our doorstep, we'd better be able to show that not only did we have policies in place to protect employees, but that they were enforced. Even the articles of incorporation and the shareholders agreement have language to force the removal of a director, which allows even members of the board to be held to account for violating company harassment policies.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I get hte impression here that many posters are stark raving terrified of women, and incredibly resentful. I imagine there are all sorts of interesting psychological reasons for these feelings, though I confess I can't quite understand them. As I said elsewhere, I've worked with women my entire working life; they've been my bosses, coworkers, and subordinates, and while I've seen my share of antisocial behavior, I never saw women having any great predilection for that kind of behavior than men. I get that when the two sexes spend a good deal of time together, there's bound to be a certain amount of sexual tension, but we are all supposed to be adults that can manage our feelings and expectations, and understand what is appropriate or inappropriate in a workplace.
But here the hate and resentment in some circles is just profoundly disturbing. I suppose some of the posters are just genuinely afraid of women, don't really understand them, don't spend any time around them, and thus easily fall into believing in some sort of "us vs. them" narrative that is becoming rather common in men's rights circles. Some perhaps have had bad experiences, and I admit when I've personal relationship problems, it's easy to fall into an emotional and overly generalized view of the opposite sex as being somehow complicit in my own problems. But again, I'm an adult, I manage these feelings, recognize them as wrong and prejudicial, and get over my own hangups.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
including a ban on anyone entering into a sexual relationship with a subordinate. While the latter isn't sexual harassment, it's terrible for morale
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with you people? Are you all incapable of actually holding down a job that involves working with women? Are you that emotionally-driven that you can't just do your goddamned job and treat your coworkers with dignity and respect
It's funny that you first suggest that seeing people having a relationship is "terrible for morale" and then accuse others of being emotionally-driven. I'd rather think that Not My Fucking Business is the non-emotionally-driven to relationships of other people in any mature collective I'm in.
Ezekiel 23:20
When a manager has a sexual relationship, or even an emotional affair, with a subordinate, it alters the workplace dynamic. People will inevitably see favoritism, whether it's fair or not, and the manager's response, either to actually show his lover favoritism, or to go to the opposite extreme and be hard on that person as a show of resolve and strength, all have implications. A good manager understands he isn't managing robots, but human beings, who take their cues from management.
That's not even talking about the fallout of a breakup, which can have legal implications. Frankly I view anyone in management having an affair with a subordinate as a form of employment suicide, and there isn't a lawyer or HR expert in the world that will say "Just tell your girlfriend's peers to mind their own business". They're going to put it on the same level of horrible idea as open bars at company functions. In the risk-assessment world, having affairs with your staff is just one big bad fucking idea.
That's why the very best policy is not to have affairs with subordinates, and it's why most modern policies either outright ban such relationships, or require that the subordinate move into another department so that they are no longer under the manager's direct supervision. My company is very small, so there aren't enough "departments" as it were, so it's pretty much an outright ban. If I want to have a relationship with one of my staff, one of us is going to have to resign.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Or, you know, just keep it in your pants like an adult.
Wasn't that the "stay small" part?
Ezekiel 23:20
And I know of at least three cases in the last five years of organizations I work with where the "down low" blew up in various unpleasant ways, one in which the Executive Director (non-profit) had a rather torrid affair with his secretary, leading to the nightmare situation of severe disruption, and ultimately forcing the Board to basically oust him and take control, though so far as I was concerned, they waited far too long, and should have forced the two of them to decide whether they wanted to remain with the organization.
Bully for the couple in question. I'm sure it can work, but there enough legal and organizational risks that in general, yes, I'd say my company policy would ban her from being his direct subordinate (or visa versa).
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I think the very idea of ascribing specific sexual behaviors to one gender is absurd, and utterly unfounded, and another example of how some posters on Slashdot seem to believe this bizarre notion that all women are whores and all men are testicle-driven morons.
My company's policy doesn't have gender specific language. It outright bans harassment, so it is irrelevant whether the harasser is a man or a woman, or the victim is a man or a woman. What counts is that the company will not tolerate the behavior, and that it has disciplinary mechanisms at its disposal up to and including termination of employment. Your myths about motivation are irrelevant, pretty much false, and would do the company know favors if it got called into court over a harassment lawsuit.
Let me ask you. Can you keep your feelings to yourself? Can you gently rebuff someone who comes on to you? Can you control your urges, get through the day, and not hit on coworkers?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
First of all, no it's not.
The job of a CEO is to increase shareholder earnings
No, it's not. There may not be any shareholders, or the shareholders may be the employees, but even assuming it's a publicly traded company with a capitalist charter, it's not. Selling all assets and allotting all proceeds as dividends would immensely increase the shareholder earnings. Investing anything in research will always reduce shareholder earnings with no guarantee of later increased earnings.
The CEOs job is to execute on the visions of the owners or board of directors. That might mean spending money to increase the chance of long term survival at the cost of short and medium term profits.
Or it might mean building a hugely expensive new head offices, because that's the vision of the board.
Doubly so when it ends.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Women want to lure men in to having sex with them. This is done for reasons of pecking order (and in this case it could result in economic benefit due to promotion) and/or a feeling of belonging somewhere and/or economic reasons and/or a desire (healthy or unhealthy) for attention. Women like workplace dating mostly because it allows them to almost entirely transcend class differences, which would be hard to do in their social circle outside work.
Yeah absolutely. That's what women do. They're just trying to catch me unawares and fall on my penis. If I'm not careful I've had 2 blowjobs before I make it out the parking lot and every time I pass by the copy machine there's a woman bent over it trying to get me to accidentally do it to her doggy style. I have to avoid elevators no matter what because they'll hit the emergency stop button and reverse gangbang me before they let me out on my floor.
It's horrible.
The reason for the rules very often arises from experience. The purely consensual no strings attached relationships do blow up and they do disrupt the workplace badly. When the don't blow up there is often accusations of nepotism or favoritism when the boss promotes the person in the sexual relationship than to the others in the group.
I've worked some places where some early relationships formed in the startup days (handful of people working in close quarters with zero free time to see anyone outside of work). Then you've got people in a relationship in relatively higher levels of power in the company. So I want to bitch about a persons behavior to my boss, except that they live together. It's hard to complain about that person to others in the company because they don't want to cause waves, and the whole thing is a minefield.
But you have to say "not with the majority of the popular vote". That's because it makes Trump turn orange with anger. And when Trump turns orange with anger you get some very entertaining tweets at 3am. And entertaining tweets from the president at 3am keeps this economy running!
But if, as society says I should, I suppress them it will cause physical illness and in many cases mental illness as well. I
Bullshit. There's nothing unhealthy about getting a grip and acting professionally. People do it all the time. It's called impulse control.
> Do you honestly think that white guys have it worse in life than everyone else?
Do you honestly believe that white guys don't have their own difficulties and inconveniences in life?
Should everybody just shut up about their own frustrations as long as there's a single group out there that has it worse?
It's also being viewed by a lot of women as a first-class ticket to unlimited media attention and a big fat legal payday.
Can you provide a few examples of women who claimed harassment, and received a payout that you feel was unjustified?
So, are they hiring over there?
Nope, didn't say that...
Just saying that the category of "white guy" is the only one that people are completely, 101% free to disparage, and attack without impunity these days.
All over sexes, and races are protected classes from attack and disparagement....."the man" is always at fault these days.
The white man is very easy to blame these days for almost any given social ill out there today.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Conversely, how many payouts can you find that were justified?
Irrelevant. That fact that there were very few justified payouts has nothing to do with the fact that (so far) zero citations for unjustified payouts have been provided by people claiming that they are common.
Let's face facts, women are very good at playing the victim card.
Your zero examples say otherwise.
Your zero examples say otherwise.
So do yours.
Nonsense. So far what we have is zero evidence of any women getting paydays from allegation complaints, justifiable or not. Against that we have allegations that there are lots of unjustified paydays. It's on the maker of the claim to support it, not on the objectors to disprove it.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
That's why the very best policy is not to have affairs with subordinates, and it's why most modern policies either outright ban such relationships, or require that the subordinate move into another department so that they are no longer under the manager's direct supervision.
I think there's a less draconian option available, which I've seen be effective at several companies.
The policy should be to require that superiors who engage in a personal, and especially sexual, relationship with any subordinate have to report the relationship to HR. Though that's all that needs to be published in the employee handbook, HR policy should then be to take something like the following actions:
1. Establish a specific reporting channel for allegations of favoritism by the superior.
2. Inform the couple that any allegations of favoritism will be assumed to be true, unless proven otherwise, and that while this is guilty-until-proven-innocent policy is perhaps unfair it's a cost of having such a relationship. Also, that any HR action taken in response to allegations will fall on both, but primarily on the superior.
3. Make clear that in the event of a breakup, it will be the responsibility of the couple to maintain a good working relationship, and that any allegation of negative impact on the workplace will be similarly assumed to be true.
4. Make clear that any promotion, bonus, etc. for the subordinate must be approved by another manager and with oversight from HR.
5. Have the superior inform all of their other subordinates of the relationship, the expected non-impact on workplace dynamics, the additional career oversight, and the reporting channel to be used if any problems are noted, with explicit instruction that there is no need to discuss any concerns with the superior first, and that it's wholly appropriate to take them directly to HR. This meeting must be attended by HR.
Faced with this situation, most couples opt to have one of them change jobs, but I have seen several who made it work, at least while they were together. It only works when the superior is already seen as fair, trustworthy and mature by their subordinates, and when the subordinates are also capable of professionalism. I've never seen it sustained effectively after a breakup; always one or the other changes jobs.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
When even an innocuous appreciative but not lecherly comment comment like "nice dress" on the one day a co-worker wears something particularly attractive is deemed sexual harassment, the movement has gone too far.
Whether that's harassment depends. Do you also compliment your male co-workers when they dress nicely? If your female co-worker indicates that she's uncomfortable with the compliment (even non-verbally), do you stop saying such things?
I can and do indeed compliment my co-workers appearance whether male or female and without fear of overbearing PC considerations, but then I've been living in France for 30 years. The bullshit where it's not what you say but how someone chooses to hear it never took root here, thankfully.
Does that mean that I can be a knuckledragging cad with my comments? No and there are penalties here for true harassment -- but not for the overbearing PC workplace environment that has become prevalent in the U.S. and that is mocked by my co-workers both male and female. As I'm the only American this and other American excesses come up regularly.
If the answers to either of those questions is "no", then yes, it's harassment, and that has nothing to do with any "movement".
How amusing that you're so deep inside the PC police state that you cannot even see it. Innocuous comments and even more so, an off color remark is only harassment and sufficient cause for a lawsuit in the U.S & less so in the U.K. Here, the PC gender police do not have the upper hand so it needs to be much more systematic.
I've counselled a few co-workers through some harassment. For one, a co-worker with whom innocent flirting was second nature (& a joy to be around) was harassed by a knuckledragger who refused to accept that flirting!=desire that his continued hitting on her and increasingly explicit sexual innuendos were unwanted which led to his spreading rumours that she was sleeping around. THAT was harassment & I'm proud to say that he lost his job in part thanks to my testimony.
Oh yeah but you go ahead and label "nice dress" harassment... If it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue